You’ve got a friend: young people help each other with their mental health for 3.5 hours every week

November 30, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Benjamin Hanckel, Senior research fellow, Western Sydney University

Young people experience mental health difficulties at a higher rate than any other age group.

While there’s ongoing discussion about the formal supports they need, young people say they’re most likely to speak with peers and friends – particularly when mental health care is difficult to access.

In partnership with youth mental health charity batyr and clinical expertise, we undertook a national survey and conducted focus groups with young people (aged 16–25 years).

We wanted to understand how young people support each other and what resources they need to keep caring for their friends in safe ways.

A critical resource

Our research included a national survey with 169 young people, as well as focus group discussions with 34 young people from Melbourne and Sydney. We found young people provide on average 3.5 hours per week of support for friends, or about 182 hours each year.

Participants spoke about being there for friends whenever they needed them, and 76% agreed friends provide critical support – often more than mental health professionals and parents or guardians.

Yeah, I think it’s easier and less confrontational talking to friends rather than family or a professional.

– Mackenzie*

This support includes assisting during tough times (such as during a relationship or family breakdown) and support due to health or financial difficulties, exam stress, as well as mental health distress. Almost 95% of young people in our study said they had helped a friend through mental ill-health.

Emotional support means “being there” for a friend, but it includes other assistance too, such as financial help, temporary housing, or connecting friends with professional services.

Young people discussed being able to provide immediate support to each other. This support is ongoing and involves more than just one encounter.

Personalised, dynamic support

All the young people we spoke to said their support changes depending on the friend, time, place and situation. Malis told us:

I think it just depends on the person and sort of like their approach to certain things […] it also just depends on the context.

They emphasised there is not a “one size fits all” approach. As Ari said:

Giving support, it’s not a formulaic thing.

group of teen girls sit in skate park — Young people said they’d ask for professional or adult support if needed.
Pexels/Cottonbro Studio, CC BY

Tailoring an approach to their friends’ needs

While there is no single approach, there are some common components to how young people support their friends.

A common first step is noticing something is wrong. This might be a mood change observed in person or online.

You know when they’re just not talking as much or they’re not really, you know, interacting with anyone [then] you kind of say ‘Okay, something’s wrong here’.

– Lara

They spoke about carefully and strategically starting conversations to make it easier for their friends to talk. Young people say this requires more than asking “Are you OK?”. Ash told us it was about “being a lot more specific and directing questions with a bit more intent”.

Sometimes friends approach them, and they spoke about being ready for them when and where they were needed; being on “standby”, as Malis put it.

Support takes place in-person and online, and sometimes moves between the two settings. Omar said a friend might start chatting on a train “and then they go online and start talking”.

Providing the right support 5 ways

Young people say providing the right support and response means working out what their friend needs, whether they want advice (or not), and taking into account their cultural background.

They spoke about taking the following actions:

sharing their own lived experiences and what worked for them
finding online resources about the issue a friend was going through and forwarding details to them
finding lists of accessible professionals and supports
taking a friend along to a mental health professional, or organising their visit with a mental health professional
talking to someone in their immediate family or network to get their friend the support they needed, though this was often considered a last resort.

The young people we spoke to said they avoided unnecessary engagements with adults. They felt they’d been entrusted with their friend’s concerns and needs. Adults were frequently seen as not understanding issues around mental health more generally.

However, if they thought a problem was beyond their control or expertise, then they would seek outside help. As Shalani said:

If I feel like it’s out of my area of expertise or something, I would probably think it’s better for them to like go elsewhere.

two pairs to feet in sneakers against graffitied wall — Adults were frequently viewed as not having a good understanding of mental health issues.
Unsplash/Aedrian, CC BY

Helping themselves too

Young people can sometimes take on too much responsibility for their friends. Young people in the study spoke about how they look after themselves to create healthy boundaries. Celine had learnt this the hard way and said:

Ultimately you can help your friend, but then you’ve got to make sure that you’re okay first to do that.

However, sometimes the lines between being a good friend and supporter and maintaining self-care were difficult. As Sam said:

I have found it difficult when I was having a hard day and had to be their support person for the whole day. It’s also difficult when you are out of the house (with family or other friends) and can tell they need you at that moment but you don’t really have the time, but you make time anyway.

Some young people didn’t provide help to a friend because they were worried about saying the wrong thing or putting the friendship at risk by expressing concern.

Helping them help each other

This study shows the critical work young people are doing to informally support each other.

We need to recognise the expertise of these young people, particularly when there are difficulties accessing formal mental health support.

We need to think about how we best resource young people in acceptable ways, so they have the tools to continue to support friends and manage feelings of responsibility.

We need to develop services and responses that include friends, and we need to create and foster public and online spaces where young people feel comfortable supporting each other, including on social media.

And ultimately, we need to address many of the underlying fundamental issues that result in tough times for young people – poverty, uncertainty, exclusion and discrimination – the social drivers that lead to and exacerbate tough times.

*Names have been changed to protect participants’ privacy.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

This project was supported by funding from batyr as well as financial support from the Western Sydney University’s Vice-Chancellor’s Research Fellowship program.

Amelia Henry, Erin Dolan, and Jasbeer Musthafa Mamalipurath do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. You’ve got a friend: young people help each other with their mental health for 3.5 hours every week – https://theconversation.com/youve-got-a-friend-young-people-help-each-other-with-their-mental-health-for-3-5-hours-every-week-194530

Many forests will become highly flammable for at least 30 extra days per year unless we cut emissions, research finds

By The Conversation -

November 30, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hamish Clarke, Senior Research Fellow, The University of Melbourne

Without strong climate action, forests on every continent will be highly flammable for at least 30 extra days per year by the end of the century – and this fire threat is far greater for some forests including the Amazon, according to our new study.

Our research in Nature Communications looked at 20 years of global satellite data to test the link between wildfires and “vapour pressure deficit” – a measure of the atmosphere’s power to suck moisture out of living and dead plants. It can also be thought of as how “thirsty” the air is.

Our results show that forest fire becomes much more likely above a certain threshold of vapour pressure deficit in many regions. This threshold depends on the type of forest.

Alarmingly, climate change is increasing the number of days the planet passes these crucial thresholds. But by urgently bringing global emissions down, we can minimise the number of extra wildfire days.

Monkeys swinging on a branch — The Amazon rainforest will become highly flammable for at least 90 extra days per year, even if we bring global emissions down.
Shutterstock

How a forest becomes flammable

Wildfire is an ancient, highly diverse phenomenon. Four key conditions for a fire are:

fuel: the leaves, branches, twigs and everything else that can catch alight in a forest
fuel moisture: whether fuel is dry enough to burn
ignition: the spark to set things off, such as a lightning strike
weather: conditions such as strong winds and high temperatures, which can aid a fire’s spread.

These four processes act as switches. All must be in the “on” position for a fire to take hold.

The drying out of fuel is particularly crucial for making a forest dangerously flammable. Indeed, many researchers are finding links between vapour pressure deficit (VPD) and fire activity.

Dew on pine — Vapour pressure deficit is lowest when the air is saturated and we see water condensing to form dew, or clouds.
Anders Mellerup/Unsplash, CC BY

VPD describes the difference between how much moisture is in the air and how much moisture the air can hold when it’s saturated. Once air becomes saturated, water will condense to form clouds or dew on leaves.

Importantly, warmer air can hold more water, which means VPD increases. We refer to the air being “thirsty” when the gap between full and empty air becomes bigger, meaning there’s a greater demand (thirst) for the water to come out of living and dead plant material, drying it out.

This is a serious issue as climate change leads to rising global temperatures.

Climate change and fire days

We analysed more than 30 million satellite records and a global climate dataset to find the maximum daily VPD, for each time and place a fire was detected.

We then measured the strength of the relationship between VPD and fire activity for different forest types in each continent. And we showed, for the first time, that in many forests there is a strong link between fire activity and VPD on any given day.

Our results show certain VPD thresholds beyond which forest fire becomes more likely than not.

For example, in boreal forests (predominantly northern European and American coniferous forests), this threshold is 0.7-1.4 kilopascals (a unit of pressure). In subtropical and tropical forests such as the Amazon, the threshold rises dramatically to 1.5-4.0 kilopascals. This means the air must be a lot thirstier to spark fire in the tropical forests of Borneo and Sumatra than in the spruce, pine and larch of Canada.

Kangaroo in burnt forest — Climate change is dramatically raising the risk of wildfires.
Shutterstock

We looked at both low- and high-emissions scenarios and found the risks are much greater if we fail to curb emissions.

If humanity continues to release greenhouse gas emissions unabated, the planet is expected to warm by around 3.7℃ by the end of the century. Under this high-emissions scenario, our study finds there are forests on every continent that will experience at least 30 extra days per year above critical flammability thresholds.

Under a lower-emissions scenario where global warming is limited to around 1.8℃, each continent will still see at least an extra 15 days per year crossing the threshold.

Parts of tropical South America including the Amazon will see the greatest increases in both scenarios by the end of the century: at least 90 additional days in a low-emissions scenario, and at least 150 extra days in a high-emissions scenario.

What are the risks?

Increasing forest fires will have serious consequences. This includes potentially destabilising patterns of fire and regrowth and disrupting the carbon storage we rely on forests for. Indeed, research last year showed the role of the Amazon rainforest as a “carbon sink” (which absorbs more CO₂ that it releases) may already be in decline.

We can also expect increasing harms to human health from wildfire smoke. It is estimated that around the world, more than 330,000 people die each year from smoke inhalation. This number could increase notably by the turn of the century, particularly in the most populated areas of South Asia and East Africa.

Our next research project will explore the links between fire, VPD and climate change in more detail in Australia, our home country. We’re also interested in the forests and regions where VPD doesn’t seem to be the main driver of fire, such as in Japan and Scandinavia.

Our discovery of reliable links between atmospheric dryness and forest fire risk in many regions means we can now develop better fire predictions, at both seasonal and near-term scales. This could bring significant benefits to those on the frontlines of fighting, managing and coexisting with wildfire.

The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Shiva Khanal from Western Sydney University to this article.

Hamish Clarke is funded by a Westpac Research Fellowship. Hamish receives or has previously received funding from Natural Hazards Research Australia, the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Cooperative Research Centre and the NSW Department of Planning, Industry and Environment via the NSW Bushfire Risk Management Research Hub.

Anne Griebel receives funding from an Australian Research Council grant.

Matthias Boer receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Country Fire Authority in Victoria. In the past, he has received funding from the New South Wales Government via the NSW Bushfire Risk Management Research Hub, and the Research Attraction and Acceleration Program; the Bushfire and Natural Hazards Co-operative Research Centre.

Rachael Helene Nolan receives funding from the NSW Rural Fire Service, the NSW Department of Planning and Environment, and the Australian Research Council.

Víctor Resco de Dios receives funding from MICINN and the European Commission.

– ref. Many forests will become highly flammable for at least 30 extra days per year unless we cut emissions, research finds – https://theconversation.com/many-forests-will-become-highly-flammable-for-at-least-30-extra-days-per-year-unless-we-cut-emissions-research-finds-195546

As more biometric data is collected in schools, parents need to ask these 10 questions

By The Conversation -

November 30, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Teresa Swist, Researcher, University of Sydney

A Sydney high school recently introduced fingerprint technology to “help narrow down” students who were vandalising school toilets.

Under the plan, students needed to to scan their fingerprints to get access to the toilets or pick-up a swipe card if they opted out.

Some parents were supportive, but other parents and digital rights advocates raised privacy and security concerns. The NSW Education Department has since noted the school is still considering how it will handle anti-social behaviour and the community will be “consulted”.

While the fingerprint plan appears to have stalled, it shows how easily biometric technology can be introduced into schools.

This debate may seem new to Australian parents but it is set to become an increasing issue, thanks to a rapidly growing education technology (“edtech”) sector.

How is biometric data being used in schools and what questions do parents need to ask?

Biometric data in schools

Biometrics measure a person’s unique physical or behavioural characteristics to identify them. This could be a fingerprint, face, iris, voice, or the way you walk, type, behave, or express an emotion.

Biometric technology was first introduced in schools in the United Kingdom around 2000. It has since become a routine part of school life. Fingerprints and facial recognition are used for things like the canteen payments, library borrowing, door access, photocopying, locker access, vending machines and laptop access.

A student walks through library shelves. — Biometric technology is used for regular school activities like borrowing books, buying canteen food and registering attendance.
Redd F/ Unsplash

It is often argued these technologies save money, time, are efficient and can respond to students’ individual needs.

In the United States, fingerprint technology was introduced in some schools around 2006. Schools also use palm scanning and facial recognition technology, although a small number of states have laws regulating the use of biometric technology in schools and Florida has banned it completely.

We don’t yet have a clear sense about the extent to which biometric data is collected in Australian schools. But in 2018 concerns were raised over trials of facial recognition technology to mark the roll in some Victorian schools. In 2015, parents raised privacy concerns when a South Australian primary school asked students for a fingerprint to “register” for the day.

Why is this a problem?

The UK’s commissioner for biometric material Fraser Sampson is calling for a ban of biometrics in UK schools. As he said in a report this year:

Harm is already very real […] Further risks to the rights and freedoms, and full and free development of the child, may not be fully realised yet.

This is similar to other calls in France and Sweden. We do not have enough independent research or a broad enough understanding of potential harms, which could range from privacy to security, identity theft, and infringements upon children’s rights and freedoms.

The rise of edtechs

Meanwhile, biometrics are part of a booming edtech sector, which is about using technology to improve teaching and learning outcomes. They can be used for school management as well as in the classroom.

According to PwC, edtech is the second largest startup community in Australia (behind financial technology) and has more than doubled since 2017. Globally it is estimated to be worth US$250 billion (A$376 billion).

But while edtech companies collect information about students, we still don’t have a good understanding of how this is then used. Or adequate regulations to protect this information.

Earlier this year in New York, about 820,000 public school students had personal information exposed after a cyber attack on a company that provides software to track grades and attendance.

Biometric technology can easily be integrated into everyday edtech and school operations to manage things like attendance, exams and how students learn.

Reports by the UK Digital Futures Commission highlight the intense pressures and uncertainties schools, students, and parents/caregivers face in a rapidly expanding edtech system. Many school community members struggle to make informed choices.

10 questions to ask about these issues

Australia lags behind other countries in understanding the short and long-term repercussions of biometrics in schools. But we can catch up.

Going forward we need more community education about different biometric technologies and a public register, so there is transparency about where technologies are being used, introduced and refused.

Parents, teachers and school communities need to be better equipped to scrutinise the potential benefits and harms. In most cases this will also need technical, ethical, policy and legal expertise.

During a recent workshop between universities, industry and advocacy groups, we developed information to help parents, schools and policymakers think about these issues and work together to discuss them. Next year we will release a resource for people to learn about edtech, register specific cases across schools, and critically evaluate technologies.

In the meantime, here are some basic questions parents can ask if a biometric technology is being used or proposed in their child’s school:

1. exactly what information is being collected, when and why?

2. how is the data being stored, processed, and analysed?

3. who has access to the system and how will it be maintained over time?

4. what data privacy and security provisions are in place?

5. what happens if I/my child opts out?

6. what implications are there for the time and expertise of teachers, and other school staff?

7. is there enough independent evidence to support claims a new technology will improve learning or school operations?

8. how will funding this technology impact other school budget and resourcing priorities?

9. is there another way to address this issue, rather than using a biometric solution?

10. has my school community had a meaningful opportunity to learn about and discuss this change?

Kalervo Gulson receives funding from the Australian Research Council

Terry Flew receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Canadian Social Science and Humanities Research Council.

Fiona Suwana and Teresa Swist do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. As more biometric data is collected in schools, parents need to ask these 10 questions – https://theconversation.com/as-more-biometric-data-is-collected-in-schools-parents-need-to-ask-these-10-questions-191263

Christmas Ransom: I quite enjoyed watching this (terrible) new Aussie Christmas film

By The Conversation -

November 30, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ari Mattes, Lecturer in Communications and Media, University of Notre Dame Australia

There’s something about the wintry quality of so much Christmas iconography – snow, mistletoe, fireplaces – that just doesn’t gel with the Southern hemisphere. So it’s not really that strange that Australian Christmas films have been so few and far between.

There is, of course, the classic adventure Bush Christmas from 1947, starring Chips Rafferty, its remake from 1983 starring Nicole Kidman, and Crackers from 1998. But until a few years ago, aside from a handful of cartoons and solid Christmas horror thrillers, festive offerings have been rare in Australia.

Stan have been doing something about this, with 2020’s A Sunburnt Christmas followed in 2021 by Christmas on the Farm, and now Christmas Ransom.

Derrick Harrington (Matt Okine) is the proprietor of a toy store that has seen better days.

When crooks Nan (Genevieve Lemon) and Shez (Bridie McKim) hold Derrick and his lead employee Pete (Ed Oxenbould) at gunpoint, demanding a ransom from Derrick’s well-heeled sister Terri (Vivienne Awosoga), it is up to pregnant security guard Gladys (Miranda Tapsell) and shoplifters Brady (Tahlia Sturzaker) and Wombat (Evan Stanhope) to foil their evil plans and save the day.

You can tell from the character names how hard Christmas Ransom strains to seem Australian. The opening sequences involve Santa hat wearing koalas and a giant blow up kangaroo Santa, Christmas letters deposited in her pouch.

There are some quirks about Christmas in Australia and, sure, everyone might have a koala ornament or two, but most of the paraphernalia in Australian Christmases is of the generic Northern hemisphere kind. So the effect seems inauthentic, straining too hard.

This is the film’s major weakness – it just tries too hard. It tries too hard to be funny, to be light-hearted, to be Australian and, most of all, to be a cheesy Christmas film. It’s not particularly effective in any of these aspects.

Straining to be clever

There is something endearingly lame about many of the best Christmas movies. Even critically-acclaimed films like It’s a Wonderful Life and the brilliant 1945 version of Christmas in Connecticut are schmaltzy to a degree that would be seen as a fault in a non-holiday film. The cheesy quality is a major source of their charm.

But it doesn’t work if a film is simultaneously trying to be clever. Christmas Ransom wants to be both a heartfelt cheeseball Christmas film and a witty, knowing take on the Christmas film genre. The mix doesn’t work.

Two people being held up. — Christmas Ransom wants to be both a heartfelt film and a witty take on the Christmas film genre.
Stan

There are numerous “wink-wink” moments to other Christmas films for viewers in the know – Harrington’s father is named Clarence, for example, recalling the angel in the Capra film. But Christmas Ransom feels the need to take things one (irritating) step further, making already obvious references explicit.

At one point, Gladys throws a Santa out the window to get the attention of the fire engine who think they’ve been mistakenly alerted, directly recalling the similar moment in Die Hard. Later, Gladys says “so this is what it means to die hard,” spelling out the reference to the infinitely better Christmas ransom film. It’s hard to understand the point – is this meant to be funny? Clever? Is it being deliberately stupid?

Some of the material would have worked well on paper – it’s Home Alone meets Die Hard with a dash of The Ref, filtered through a daggy Aussie sensibility – and you can understand why the script would have been greenlit.

There are some funny and cute ideas: an assault with a swimming noodle; thieves hiding in a ball pit; hostages tied up with tinsel and Christmas lights. As the camera pulls back to reveal the very ordinary building at the beginning of the film, Gladys’ voiceover tells us Harrington and Sons is “the greatest toy store in the whole wide world – or at least in the greater metropolitan region.”

The thief holds a pool noodle. — There are cute ideas, like an assault with a swimming noodle.
Stan

Christmas Ransom could appear fresh, engaging, sweet but also clever in its approach to the Christmas movie. There’s romance. There’s action. There’s fractured relationships between partners and siblings overcome by the end. There is a general waning of Christmas spirit that is remedied – a common trope of the genre – with the toy store transformed into the kind of thriving wonderland of movie-world (think the toy store in Home Alone 2) in the final sequences.

But it all seems rather forced. The kind of comedic overacting that works in films like the Hulk Hogan-starring Christmas masterpiece Santa With Muscles doesn’t pay off here. The numerous fart jokes may appeal to very young children, but probably not many others. The music labours to keep us engaged, but also seems deliberately hammy and thus pointless in a film that isn’t quite committed to being a spoof.

The good and the bad

This is not to suggest it’s not worth watching. In fact, I quite enjoyed watching this terrible Aussie Christmas film.

For aficionados of Christmas cinema, the good and the bad, Christmas Ransom is light-hearted and silly enough to be bearable. There are some endearingly daggy zany moments and the lameness of much of it isn’t necessarily a problem for this kind of fare. But it just doesn’t work as well when it tries to be clever, because it’s not.

A ball bounces off Miranda Tapsell's pregnant belly. — Christmas Ransom is light hearted and silly enough to be bearable.
Stan

And even if its 83 minute run time seems overlong, it compares favourably with much of the other straight-to-streaming Christmas films – next to Santa Girl it looks like Vertigo – and it’s fun watching a bad Christmas film from Australia for a change.

Christmas Ransom is on Stan from December 1.

Ari Mattes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Christmas Ransom: I quite enjoyed watching this (terrible) new Aussie Christmas film – https://theconversation.com/christmas-ransom-i-quite-enjoyed-watching-this-terrible-new-aussie-christmas-film-194515

We built an algorithm that predicts the length of court sentences – could AI play a role in the justice system?

By The Conversation -

November 30, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andrew Lensen, Lecturer in Artificial Intelligence | Pūkenga, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

The rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI) has led to its deployment in courtrooms overseas. In China, robot judges decide on small claim cases, while in some Malaysian courts, AI has been used to recommend sentences for offences such as drug possession.

Is it time New Zealand considers AI in its own judicial system?

Intuitively, we do not want to be judged by a computer. And there are good reasons for our reluctance – with valid concerns over the potential for bias and discrimination. But does this mean we should be afraid of any and all use of AI in the courts?

In our current system, a judge sentences a defendant once they have been found guilty. Society trusts judges to hand down fair sentences based on their knowledge and experience.

But sentencing is a task AI may be able to perform instead – after all, AI machines are already used to predict some criminal behaviour, such as financial fraud. Before considering the role of AI in the court room, then, we need a clear understanding of what it actually is.

AI simply refers to a machine behaving in a way that humans identify as “intelligent”. Most modern AI is machine learning, where a computer algorithm learns the patterns within a set of data. For example, a machine learning algorithm could learn the patterns in a database of houses on Trade Me in order to predict house prices.

So, could AI sentencing be a feasible option in New Zealand’s courts? What might it look like? Or could AI at least assist judges in the sentencing process?

Inconsistency in the courts

In New Zealand, judges must weigh a number of mitigating and aggravating variables before deciding on a sentence for a convicted criminal. Each judge uses their discretion in deciding the outcome of a case. At the same time, judges must strive for consistency across the judicial system.

Consistency means similar offences should receive similar penalties in different courts with different judges. To enhance consistency, the higher level courts have prepared guideline judgements that judges refer to during sentencing.

But discretion works the opposite way. In our current system, judges should be free to individualise the sentence after a complete evaluation of the case.

Judges need to factor in individual circumstances, societal norms, the human condition and the sense of justice. They can use their experience and sense of humanity, make moral decisions and even sometimes change the law.

In short, there is a “desirable inconsistency” that we cannot currently expect from a computer. But there may also be some “undesirable inconsistency”, such as bias or even extraneous factors like hunger. Research has shown that in some Israeli courts, the percentage of favourable decisions drops to nearly zero before lunch.

The potential role of AI

This is where AI may have a role in sentencing decisions. We set up a machine learning algorithm and trained it using 302 New Zealand assault cases, with sentences between zero and 14.5 years of imprisonment.

Based on this data, the algorithm built a model that can take a new case and predict the length of a sentence.

The beauty of the algorithm we used is that the model can explain why it made certain predictions. Our algorithm quantifies the phrases the model weighs most heavily when calculating the sentence.

To evaluate our model, we fed it 50 new sentencing scenarios it had never seen before. We then compared the model’s predicted sentence length with the actual sentences.

The relatively simple model worked quite well. It predicted sentences with an average error of just under 12 months.

The model learned that words or phrases such as “sexual”, “young person”, “taxi” and “firearm” correlated with longer sentences, while words such as “professional”, “career”, “fire” and “Facebook” correlated with shorter sentences.

Many of the phrases are easily explainable – “sexual” or “firearm” may be linked with aggravated forms of assault. But why does “young person” weigh towards more time in prison and “Facebook” towards less? And how does an average error of 12 months compare to variations in human judges?

The answers to those questions are possible avenues for future research. But it is a useful tool to help us understand sentencing better.

The future of AI in courtrooms

Clearly, we cannot test our model by employing it in the courtroom to deliver sentences. But it gives us an insight into our sentencing process.

Judges could use this type of modelling to understand their sentencing decisions, and perhaps remove extraneous factors. AI models could also be used by lawyers, providers of legal technology and researchers to analyse the sentencing and justice system.

Maybe the AI model could also help create some transparency around controversial decisions, such as showing the public that seemingly controversial sentences like a rapist receiving home detention may not be particularly unusual.

Most would argue that the final assessments and decisions on justice and punishment should be made by human experts. But the lesson from our experiment is that we should not be afraid of the words “algorithm” or “AI” in the context of our judicial system. Instead, we should be discussing the real (and not imagined) implications of using those tools for the common good.

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. We built an algorithm that predicts the length of court sentences – could AI play a role in the justice system? – https://theconversation.com/we-built-an-algorithm-that-predicts-the-length-of-court-sentences-could-ai-play-a-role-in-the-justice-system-193300

Albanese insists Voice will help ‘close the gap’, as divisions flare in Nationals

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

As the Indigenous Voice provoked divisions in the Nationals, Anthony Albanese rejected the party’s claim it wouldn’t help “close the gap” for First Nations Australians.

The federal Nationals, announcing this week they’ll oppose the Voice, argued it would not have practical outcomes.

But Albanese said experience showed when people directly affected by an issue were consulted and had a sense of ownership over solutions, “they will be more engaged”.

So gaps in education, health, housing, life expectancy and incarceration rates “will be closed”.

Albanese, speaking at an NBL Indigenous round presentation, repeated that the referendum for the Voice will be held in the next financial year – which means not before June at the earliest.

The Nationals’ decision sparked a vitriolic response on Tuesday from Indigenous leader Noel Pearson, while the Western Australian party dissociated itself from the federal party’s position.

Pearson described the Nationals as a “squalid little party” – while saying previously it had been the most supportive party of the idea of the Voice.

He said its leader, David Littleproud, was “like a kindergarten kid, not a leader.

“The Nationals have foisted the mantle of leadership on a boy,” he told the ABC.

Pearson said the arrival in parliament of Indigenous Nationals Northern Territory senator Jacinta Price, a fierce opponent of the Voice, “has turned everything around”.

Accusing Price of being a puppet of conservative think tanks, he said she was caught up in “a tragic redneck celebrity vortex”.

“It involves right-wing people, particularly the Sydney and Melbourne-based right-wing think tanks, the Institute of Public Affairs and the Centre for Independent Studies.

“They’re the string-pullers – they’re the ones who have lined up behind Jacinta,” he said. “Their strategy was to find a blackfella to punch down on other blackfellas.”

In caucus, Albanese denounced Price’s personal swipe on Monday at the Minister for Indigenous Australians, Linda Burney.

Price said Burney “might be able to take a private jet out into a remote community, dripping with Gucci, and tell people in the dirt what’s good for them”.

Albanese described her comment as “repulsive and absurd”.

The WA Nationals leader Mia Davies on Tuesday said her party would support the Voice.

Davies said she agreed with much of what Littleproud said about practical outcomes and closing the gap.

“Where we part ways here in Western Australia is that I don’t think it’s one or the other. I think we can do both,” she told the ABC. “We can have a conversation about the Voice, and we can also talk about practical and on-ground investment right now to support Aboriginal communities and individuals.”

Federal Nationals MP Andrew Gee, a former minister in the Morrison government, has also rejected the party’s Monday decision.

Gee, who wasn’t at Monday’s meeting, said he had been a long-time supporter of The Voice to parliament.

His position on the Voice hadn’t changed, he said in a Facebook post.

“While I respect the opinions of my colleagues, I’m still a supporter.”

He said the government needed to give more detail on what was proposed. “A number of our local Indigenous groups want this detail as well. because they want to make sure they have a voice within the Voice.

“To achieve a Voice we’ll need that as well as goodwill, open minds and generosity of spirit. Reconciliation in Australia has made significant progress in recent years but there is still a long way for us all to travel,” Gee said.

“Let’s keep working at it and walking down that road. Together we can do it. ”

In question time Burney said “decades of failed government policies have not worked. A voice for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians is the best chance we have, and perhaps ever will have, to address the injustices of the past and create change that will deliver a better future.”

“This isn’t about dividing people. It is about uniting Australians. Giving First Nations people a say in the matters that affect us. Not being told what is best by bureaucrats.”

Labor MPs gave her a round of applause.

At the Coalition joint parties meeting Peter Dutton said the Liberals were not yet ready to make a decision on their attitude to The Voice.

Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Albanese insists Voice will help ‘close the gap’, as divisions flare in Nationals – https://theconversation.com/albanese-insists-voice-will-help-close-the-gap-as-divisions-flare-in-nationals-195564

We all know the Great Barrier Reef is in danger – the UN has just confirmed it. Again

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jon C. Day, PSM, Adjunct Senior Research Fellow, ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University

You might be forgiven for thinking it’s Groundhog Day reading headlines about the Great Barrier Reef potentially being listed on the World Heritage “in danger” list. After all, there have been similar calls in 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2017.

Successive federal governments have lobbied hard to keep the largest coral reef in the world off the high-profile list kept by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).

Only last year, former environment minister Sussan Ley jetted around the world in a successful effort to stave off the inevitable, pointing to hundreds of millions of dollars spent on issues such as water quality. The new minister, Tanya Plibersek, also wants to avoid having the reef “singled out” in this way.

The question is, what does in-danger mean? Everyone knows the reef is in trouble. An in-danger listing is not a sanction or punishment. Rather, it’s a call to the international community that a World Heritage property is under threat, requiring actions to protect it for future generations. In-danger listing is not permanent, nor does it mean the Reef will be permanently removed from the World Heritage list.

The reef faces a multitude of threats. The most significant threats are coral bleaching worsened by climate change, poor water quality from land-based runoff, and unsustainable fishing and coastal development. We already have regulations to tackle many of them – but we need more effective enforcement to ensure compliance.

What just happened?

The Great Barrier Reef has been World Heritage listed since 1981. This means it’s considered an area of outstanding value to humanity. Covering an area the size of Italy, this iconic area includes some 3,000 separate reefs, over 1,000 islands and a variety of other significant habitats.

The latest UN mission has just reported back, finding the reef’s condition is worsening and recommending it be listed as “in danger”. It also offered practical solutions.

Previous governments have fought to ensure the reef is not listed as in-danger despite their own five-yearly reviews demonstrating an obvious decline. In 2009, the reef’s condition was rated poor and declining. In 2014 it was poor and declining and in 2019, very poor and declining.

So the government knows the reef is in danger. We know, and the tourism industry knows. While some tourism operators worry about their business, the opposite appears to be true: more people go, thinking it might be their last chance to see it. And already, operators are adapting by taking tourists to areas still in good condition.

Federal governments just don’t want the reef on the list because of the hit to their international reputation – and to their domestic standing.

If the reef is officially listed as “in danger” next year, it will draw a much greater focus to the reef’s plight. And that may help galvanise effective national and global action.

Take the case of the famous coral reefs of Belize in Central America. When these reefs were listed, the government banned nearby oil exploration and protected mangroves. Belize’s reefs have now been taken off the in-danger list.

So what has to be done?

The mission’s report lays out what needs to be done for the major issues.

Australia already has a long-term plan aimed at ensuring the reef’s sustainability. There are regulations governing, say, sediment and water quality in run off from agriculture and towns. We have some targets too, particularly around water quality.

flood plume reef — This 2019 photo shows two threats to the Great Barrier Reef: coal ships anchored near Abbot Point and a flood plume from the Burdekin River. These plumes can carry pollutants and debris to the reef.
Matt Curnock, Author provided

The problem is delivery. There is a need to scale up efforts and improve compliance. Regulations mean very little if there’s ineffective enforcement. For example, while most farmers have taken on board the rules around fertiliser use, erosion and run-off, those flouting the rules get only a slap on the wrist. As the state government notes, enforcement is a “last resort”.

The UN mission has called on Australia to improve in four key areas:

1. Look after land and water

When native vegetation is cleared, it makes erosion more likely. Eroded soils are washed downstream and out to sea, where they can settle on coral and seagrass, smothering them. In Queensland, native vegetation is still being cleared at unsustainable levels.

2. Phase out gillnets

These long nets catch fish by their gills. But they also catch dugongs, dolphins and turtles, which then die. The UN mission made a very strong recommendation: phase out gillnets in the marine park.

3. More effective disposal of dredge spoil

Dredging shipping channels and ports produces a lot of silt and sand. If this is dumped in shallow areas, it can also spread to nearby corals and seagrass beds already under stress from climate change. A previous government policy ended the dumping of capital dredge spoil (dredging previously undisturbed areas). But maintenance dredge spoil is still being dumped at sea or used for reclamation, both causing adverse impacts.

4. Tackle climate change

This month, the northern reefs are sweltering in record water temperatures – raising the chance of further bleaching events. The UN report makes it clear that climate change is the biggest threat. Climate change heats up tropical waters, causing coral bleaching and potentially coral death. Australia, as one of the world’s top exporters of fossil fuels gas and coal, has long tried to go slow on climate action. The new government has moved to legislate a stronger 2030 emissions reduction target, but the UN report calls for even more ambition to keep warming under 1.5℃ as this is widely accepted as the critical threshold for reef survival.

The report doesn’t make reference to the impacts of shipping on nearby coral and seagrass areas, such as sediment churned up by propellers of large ships and tankers.

Death by a thousand cuts

If you dive the reef for the first time this year, you might wonder if there really is a problem. After all, there are still fish and coral. When I first dove on the reef more than 35 years ago, it was in much better condition. What you see now may seem okay – but it’s a pale shadow of what it could or should be. It’s death by a thousand cuts.

As reef expert Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg has said:

The reef is in dire trouble, but it’s decades away before it’s no longer worth visiting. That’s the truth. But unless we wake up and deal with climate change sincerely and deeply then we really will have a Great Barrier Reef not worth visiting.

We’re never going to restore the reef to its pre-European conditions. But unless we take real action, future generations will wonder how and why we failed them so badly. We don’t need to wait for the World Heritage Committee to make in-danger listing to know the reef is in real trouble.

Jon Day previously worked for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority between 1986 and 2014, and was one of the Directors at GBRMPA between 1998 and 2014. He represented Australia as one of the formal delegates to the World Heritage Committee between 2007-2011.

– ref. We all know the Great Barrier Reef is in danger – the UN has just confirmed it. Again – https://theconversation.com/we-all-know-the-great-barrier-reef-is-in-danger-the-un-has-just-confirmed-it-again-195551

How Australian economist Sean Turnell came to be in and freed from a Myanmar jail

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tim Harcourt, Industry Professor and Chief Economist, University of Technology Sydney

Macquarie University economist Sean Turnell is free and living in Sydney after 650 days of imprisonment in Myanmar, for what appears to be the “crime” of doing an economist’s job, which is trying to make people’s lives better – in this case the lives of the people of Myanmar.

A former Reserve Bank of Australia official, Turnell worked as an economic adviser to the government of Aung San Suu Kyi and continued to advise her after she was overthrown in a coup in February 2021.

He was imprisoned on trumped-up charges over the handling of confidential information – even though the papers he had in his possession were the papers he needed for his role as an economic adviser.

As a family friend and fellow economist, I was part of the campaign to get him released. Here are some personal reflections on Sean and that campaign.

Who is Sean Turnell?

Even before he set foot in Myanmar, Turnell’s story was a remarkable one.

He grew up in a working class family in the south western Sydney suburb of Macquarie Fields in the federal electorate of Werriwa, then represented by Labor’s Gough Whitlam. Sean’s dad, Peter Turnell, scored an invite to Whitlam’s house 50 years ago this week to celebrate Whitlam’s election as prime minister.

Whitlam ensured that Werriwa was sewered (it hadn’t been) and, by making university free, gave Sean the opportunity to go to Macquarie University.

As an academic at Macquarie University, Sean’s interest in Myanmar stemmed from his interest in social justice in general, from his own upbringing, and also getting to know Burmese students as an undergraduate at Macquarie.

Myanmar’s economy, after years of military rule (with the population of Canberra in the army despite no external threat) was underperforming. But Sean thought it had the potential of a Thailand or Vietnam with the right economic policies.

Sean established “Burma Watch”, a much-followed publication of economic data and analysis on the Myanmar economy, and then wrote an influential book on Myanmar’s financial system, Fiery Dragons that made him an internationally-recognised expert on the subject.

His reputation gained the interest and confidence of Aung San Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy. Sean became a trusted adviser of “The Lady” when she was under house arrest and during the short time democracy was restored. He remains loyal to her to this day.

A global network of support

Macquarie University was also where Sean met the love of his life, his wife Ha Vu (also a development economist), who with other Macquarie University staff campaigned tirelessly for his release.

I have spoken to Sean several times since his release, and he has just started to realise how big the campaign to free him was.

He would like to thank the supporters in Australia and internationally who worked tirelessly for his release, among them Macquarie University economists David Throsby and Wylie Bradford, Peter McCawley at the Australian National University and Leanne Ussher of Bard College in New York, and American microfinance economist Curtis Slover, who delivered him food while in prison.

He had help from unexpected quarters. Bruce Wolpe, a former US Congressional aide, offered to enlist former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who had successfully negotiated for the release of US journalist Danny Fenster.

In Australia, Sean’s campaign was assisted by two former ambassadors to Myanmar, Christopher Lamb and Nicholas Coppel. Both provided strategic advice and specific knowledge to the campaign and Lamb’s Australian Myanmar Institute provided resources and networks.

The union movement helped, as did the Economic Society of Australia, the hard-working officers of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and publications including The Conversation.

The energetic Labor MP for Lismore, Janelle Saffin, used her expertise and links. While having to deal with the Lismore floods at home, she found time to make waves in Myanmar.

The political campaign picked up after the election in May. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong became tireless in their advocacy, raising Sean’s case in international and regional meetings and pulling out all stops for Sean’s release.

Reflection, then a book

What next for Sean and Ha? It is unlikely Sean can ever return to Myanmar, although he says “he will always love the people of Myanmar”.

It might pay for Sean to be an armchair economist, at least for a while. He will be putting his literary skills to good use, writing a book about his ordeal and telling the story from inside and outside the prison’s walls.

And there is time for fun for Ha and Sean too. He is likely to want to see the musical Hamilton as, even before it began, he was fascinated with the life of the first Treasury Secretary of the United States, even visiting his archives in Washington DC in his holidays.

The people of Myanmar and Australia’s Burmese community are extraordinarily grateful. Thi Thi Power, a friend of Sean’s, said in tears when hearing of his release: “The Burmese people owe Sean one thousand times over”.

Tim Harcourt is a friend of Sean Turnell.

– ref. How Australian economist Sean Turnell came to be in and freed from a Myanmar jail – https://theconversation.com/how-australian-economist-sean-turnell-came-to-be-in-and-freed-from-a-myanmar-jail-195419

Politics with Michelle Grattan: Niki Savva on her book Bulldozed, Scott Morrison and the Liberals’ woes

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Six months after Scott Morrison was ousted, he remains a centre of attention, with parliament set to censure him on Wednesday over his multi-ministry power grab.

In exquisite timing, journalist Niki Savva’s book Bulldozed is released this week. It documents Morrison’s style, which eventually shocked even those closest to him in government.

“He’s a very secretive character. He’s distrustful. He’s a control freak. He’s a bully. He’s stubborn. He doesn’t listen to anyone,” Savva says. “And he was, as Alex Hawke [former minister and a Morrison numbers man] has said on the record, addicted to executive authority. He liked to be in absolute control, taking every decision but not taking responsibility for every decision.”

Savva says Hawke believed Morrison was frightened of a leadership challenge. “Alex Hawke […] believed Morrison was panic stricken by the thought that both left and right were out to get him. And although he was worried about Frydenberg, he was more worried about Dutton. He thought that there would be a move initiated by Frydenberg and then Dutton would come through the middle.”

Getting people to talk for this sort of book “is a very curious kind of process,” Savva says. “Some people are very keen to tell their story, to give their version of events, and also to set history straight. Other people are a bit more circumspect.”

Savva worked for Peter Costello during the Howard years. Asked how the Liberal Party differs now, she says: “I think a lot of it has to do with leadership. A lot of it has to do with the quality of the people who are actually in parliament now and also with the quality of the staff.”

“Howard had a respect for the Liberal Party and he always called it the ‘broad church’. So he always made sure that the right and the left wings of the Liberal Party always felt as if they had a place at the table and that they would be heard.”

“They don’t have so much a progressive voice inside the Liberal Party now and that’s why they’ve done so badly.”

So what should Peter Dutton’s game plan be, and can he ever win an election?

“Anything is possible in the way that anything is possible. But I don’t think it’s going to happen if he continues as he’s begun. I think he does need to confront, you know, those difficult issues […] He’s been too worried about what the conservative wing might think or what the Nationals might think, when I think he should have been intent on saying what the Liberals think and reshaping the Liberals in those areas.”

– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Niki Savva on her book Bulldozed, Scott Morrison and the Liberals’ woes – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-niki-savva-on-her-book-bulldozed-scott-morrison-and-the-liberals-woes-195562

Yes, the Chinese protests are about politics and freedom. But they are also about what COVID might do if it is let loose now

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Chin, Professor of Asian Studies, University of Tasmania

While a lot of attention has been given to the unprecedented protests in China about the “dynamic zero COVID” policy, not much has been written about the wider political context, and particularly the young people leading the protests.

These young protesters have proven to be agile, and appear to be always a couple of steps ahead of the authorities, who are desperate to keep a lid on any uprising. They particularly do not want the wider world to know the extent of the protests.

There have been reports that at the heart of the protests is a call for greater political freedom, and these young people are using the zero-COVID policy as the platform to seek more openness. This should not come as a surprise to anyone keeping an eye on China since the pandemic measures were first introduced in 2020.

President Xi Jinping has made zero-COVID one of his signature programs, along with the “China Dream”, and used it to get a precedent-breaking third term at the five-yearly Communist Party congress in October. All opposition was crushed, and nothing was allowed to derail his ascendency.

Now that Xi has cemented his status as the most powerful Chinese leader since Mao, why wouldn’t he relax the zero-COVID policy in line with the rest of the world?

The easy answer would be that he would lose too much “face” if he were to back down. I would suggest Xi is actually more worried that a relaxed policy will lead to more deaths among the elderly.

Close to 20% of China’s population is over 60, and the percentage is higher in rural areas where health services are poor. Most of the COVID deaths this year are associated with old people. The vaccination rates among the old, especially those in the rural areas, are significantly lower than the overall figure.

Latest figures released by the government show that in Shanghai, only 62% of those over 60 are vaccinated, with 38% boosted. But in the most vulnerable over-80 age group, this number fell to just 15% fully vaccinated. You can imagine what the figures would be like for those living in the rural interiors of China.

Xi is simply unwilling to pay the political price for large numbers of elderly Chinese dying. His hold on power may even be affected if there is a sudden spike in deaths due to COVID.

One should not underestimate the political consequences: unlike in the West, many elderly Chinese in rural areas live with their children. Even though large numbers of Chinese clearly want to restrictions lifted, he will be blamed for the opening up leading to more deaths.

Why hasn’t Xi Jinping relaxed China’s strict COVID conditions? He may be concerned about the death toll among older people if the virus is allowed to roam free.
Jack Taylor/AP/AAP

So, where does that leave us? On the one hand, it’s clear the young people want more freedom and restrictions lifted, including more political freedom. The zero-COVID policy has turned out to be the most effective platform to get their message out. There is every chance that if the authorities cannot slow down or crush the protests, the next step will be nationwide protests where other dissatisfied groups will join in.

At this stage, Xi will probably have to deploy the full security apparatus, which will likely result in high numbers of protester arrests. China has perfected the art of putting an entire segment of the population under detention for a period to cool the political temperature – the suppression of the Uyghurs is just one example.

Similarities with Iran

One cannot help but see parallels between what is happening in China and the protest movement in Iran.

In Iran, the young people mobilised against the regime over the death of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old Iranian of Kurdish origin. She died in detention three days after she was arrested for allegedly breaching the Islamic dress code for women. The authorities deny she was mistreated, but she died while in custody.

The nationwide protests were led by young people and have now reached a stage where the entire regime is at risk.

At the heart of the protest is politics – Amini’s death was the trigger for young women in particular to take to the streets and call for political freedom from theocracy. It has been more than two months since the protests began, and there is no sign they are slowing down.

Young people in China, like those in Iran, want political freedoms and reforms, and want their voices to be heard and acted on. They were looking for a trigger point and found it in the COVID restrictions.

Where to from here?

It would be foolish to guess what will happen next in China, or even Iran. The inner workings of both regimes are opaque to the outside world. In China, Xi’s formidable political skills may be such that he will be able to find a way out while remaining in power.

The danger is that the longer the protests continue, the more dangerous they become. The security forces in China are brutal, and their actions against the protesters could easily get out control.

The saddest thing about the protests in Iran and China is the inability of the outside world to do anything. In both cases, the regime can completely ignore what the rest of the world thinks. In the meantime, the world can only watch, with horror, and wait to see what happens next.

James Chin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Yes, the Chinese protests are about politics and freedom. But they are also about what COVID might do if it is let loose now – https://theconversation.com/yes-the-chinese-protests-are-about-politics-and-freedom-but-they-are-also-about-what-covid-might-do-if-it-is-let-loose-now-195553

‘Zombie’ wage deals have hurt Australians for years. Here’s how new industrial relations laws could finally end your wage pain

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Independent Senator David Pocock will vote for the government’s industrial relations bill. Mick Tsikas/AAP

Imagine you were trying to design a system that would hold back wages. You would design one pretty much like the one we’ve got today.

That’s why the government wants to change it.

Those of us on enterprise bargaining agreements get our wage rises locked in only every three or so years. If we didn’t lock in enough in last year’s agreement to cover this year’s sudden outbreak of inflation, there’s nothing much we can do about it for another two or so years.

It’s a built-in inertia identified by financial services firm JP Morgan in its attempts to explain to foreign clients why Australian wages growth is so low.

Australian enterprise agreements, JP Morgan explains in a note to clients, both delay wages growth and trim its peaks.

Here’s how that came about – and how the Albanese government’s new industrial relations law might finally end Australians’ pay freeze.

Wages used to be mostly set by awards

For nearly a century, Australian wages were generally set by judges in state and federal industrial relations tribunals. They had the power to intervene and set an “award” wage for an industry or occupation in which there was a dispute. And it was easy enough for unions and employers to create disputes.

Because they almost always intervened, the tribunals got to ensure that wages didn’t move too much relative to each other, and it got an insight into the state of the economy from the government, which made submissions.

From one point of view, the strength of this peculiarly Australian system of setting wages was that each employer covered by a decision was compelled to deliver the same increase as its competitors, meaning none were disadvantaged.

From another point of view, this strength was becoming a weakness. The weak firms as well as the strong had to pay the increases, whether it was easy or not.

Enterprise agreements unleashed productivity

In the early 1990s, perhaps with an eye to the possibility that an incoming Coalition government might make even greater changes, the Keating Labor government changed the law to channel the workers and employers within each workplace into enterprise bargaining.

The tribunals would have a more limited role, checking that each enterprise agreement passed a “better off overall” test, and continuing to set awards that became more like backstops, slipping below what most workers (usually through their unions) were able to negotiate with individual employers.

Workers and unions did well at first, because they were able to get together with employers and nut out ways to save money to pay for wage rises – something they had had little incentive to do when wages were set centrally.

And it was something that could only really be done at the level of each enterprise, because each was different, and it was the workers on the ground who knew how to make it better.

Zombie agreements and frozen wages

But productivity couldn’t be unleashed in the same way forever. After a while, the easy gains had been had. Workers got good pay rises in return for streamlining unwieldy processes at the start, then had few unwieldy processes left to streamline.

Productivity surged during the first decade, until the early 2000s. Then employers became more cautious about granting pay rises, and by the 2010s became good at stringing out negotiations or letting agreements expire, which meant they rolled over as “zombie agreements” without an increase.

Some Australians have ended up living with frozen wages.

As the Business Council explained in a report on the state of enterprise bargaining
in 2019, agreements that had lapsed but were still operational came to act “like a wage freeze for some employees”.

With union membership down from 40% of workers when enterprise bargaining began, to just 14% in 2020, there was little workers on frozen agreements could do to get more, other than fall back on awards, which at least usually climbed with inflation.

It means the system has come to work in a way hardly anyone actually intended. It is acting as a brake on pay rises, while becoming more centralised.

The Reserve Bank says it can see some signs that wages growth is picking up, even in new enterprise agreements, but that it will take some time to flow through to all agreements in general because of the “multi-year duration” of the agreements.

How the new law could break the pay freeze

What the Albanese government has proposed – and is about to finally get through the Senate with the help of the Greens and independent David Pocock – is an attempt to bust the inertia.

Expanding multi-employer bargaining will allow employers to bargain knowing their competitors will have to pay what they pay.

Air-conditioning manufacturers have already begun talks with the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union in a bid to drive up workplace standards and pay in a way they know won’t be undercut by cheaper competitors.

Allowing employers with genuine ongoing enterprise agreements to escape multi-employer bargaining will encourage more genuine agreements.

And loosening the “better off overall” test will make it easier to get agreements of all kinds registered.

Particularly helpful will be “supported bargaining”, in which the Fair Work Commission will sit around the table with workers in fields such as childcare, who have traditionally found it hard to bargain. Where necessary, the commission will pull in outside funders (such as the government for childcare) for talks.

None of it will work miracles. But it should help. And it’s unlikely to hurt.

Peter Martin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. ‘Zombie’ wage deals have hurt Australians for years. Here’s how new industrial relations laws could finally end your wage pain – https://theconversation.com/zombie-wage-deals-have-hurt-australians-for-years-heres-how-new-industrial-relations-laws-could-finally-end-your-wage-pain-195534

‘Zombie’ wage deals have hurt Australians for years. Here’s how new industrial relations law could finally end your wage pain

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Imagine you were trying to design a system that would hold back wages. You would design one pretty much like the one we’ve got today.

That’s why the government wants to change it.

It’s a built-in inertia identified by financial services firm JP Morgan in its attempts to explain to foreign clients why Australian wages growth is so low.

Australian enterprise agreements, JP Morgan explains in a note to clients, both delay wages growth and trim its peaks.

Here’s how that came about – and how the Albanese government’s new industrial relations law might finally end Australians’ pay freeze.

Wages used to be mostly set by awards

From another point of view, this strength was becoming a weakness. The weak firms as well as the strong had to pay the increases, whether it was easy or not.

Enterprise agreements unleashed productivity

And it was something that could only really be done at the level of each enterprise, because each was different, and it was the workers on the ground who knew how to make it better.

Zombie agreements and frozen wages

It means the system has come to work in a way hardly anyone actually intended. It is acting as a brake on pay rises, while becoming more centralised.

How the new law could break the pay freeze

What the Albanese government has proposed – and is about to finally get through the Senate with the help of the Greens and independent David Pocock – is an attempt to bust the inertia.

Expanding multi-employer bargaining will allow employers to bargain knowing their competitors will have to pay what they pay.

Allowing employers with genuine ongoing enterprise agreements to escape multi-employer bargaining will encourage more genuine agreements.

And loosening the “better off overall” test will make it easier to get agreements of all kinds registered.

Particularly helpful will be “supported bargaining”, in which the Fair Work Commission will itself sit around the table with workers in fields such as childcare, who have traditionally found it hard to bargain. Where necessary, the commission will pull in outside funders (such as the government for childcare) for talks.

None of it will work miracles. But it should help. And it’s unlikely to hurt.

– ref. ‘Zombie’ wage deals have hurt Australians for years. Here’s how new industrial relations law could finally end your wage pain – https://theconversation.com/zombie-wage-deals-have-hurt-australians-for-years-heres-how-new-industrial-relations-law-could-finally-end-your-wage-pain-195534

At-home DNA tests just aren’t that reliable – and the risks may outweigh the benefits

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Andelka M. Phillips, Senior Lecturer in Law, Science and Technology, The University of Queensland

The field of genomic science is rapidly advancing, with commercial genetic tests becoming affordable and popular.

Taking these tests is simple. The company sends you a collection kit. You send it back with a saliva sample or cheek swab. The sample is sequenced and analysed, and before long you have your results.

However, upon a closer look you’ll find commercial genetic tests come with several hidden risks, and consumers often don’t understand what they’re signing up for. Here are some important factors to consider if you’re thinking of getting one.

Ancestry tests

The most common personal genomics tests are ancestry tests, offered by companies including Ancestry, 23andMe, FamilyTreeDNA and MyHeritage.

Ancestry tests are marketed as a way to explore your ancestral origins. But since different companies use different methods, and even different “ethnicity” categorisations, you may get inconsistent results. For example, Kristen V. Brown wrote for Gizmodo about how her saliva sample produced three different results from AncestryDNA, 23andMe and National Geographic.

In another example, a 2019 CBC Marketplace experiment involved sending the DNA of identical twins to five different companies. Each company returned surprisingly different results. Mark Gerstein, a Yale University bioinformatics expert, suspected the differences came down to different algorithms being used to process the raw data.

Health tests

The industry also offers tests for a variety of health conditions. A test may claim to provide you with predictions of your risk of developing breast cancer or Alzheimer’s. Carrier tests indicate whether you’re likely to pass on a particular condition to your child.

But users can get contradictory results here too. One company might indicate you’re at a heightened risk of colon cancer, while another might say you have reduced risk. Not to mention genes are only one factor in most complex diseases.

In an investigation by the US Government Accountability Office, tests from four companies delivered highly varied results. The report concluded:

The test results we received are misleading and of little or no practical use to consumers. […] The experts we spoke with agreed that the companies’ claims and test results are both ambiguous and misleading.

A genetic test in a medical clinic is governed by many rules and laws. A commercial test bought online is mostly subject to the company’s own terms and conditions and privacy policy. And, as we all know, these terms and conditions are often too long and unreadable for most people.

Low predictive value

Another type of test is a “talent test”, which purports to tell parents whether their child will have a high IQ, or excel in certain activities such as music or sport. These tests aren’t validated – and for many talents there’s no strong evidence genes play a key role in their development.

Regarding talent tests for “sporting ability,” a consensus statement published in the British Medical Journal of Sports Medicine said:

[…] the consensus is that the predictive value of such tests in the context of training responses or talent identification in sport is virtually zero.

Yet talent tests are growing in popularity, especially in China. What’s particularly concerning is these tests may promote ideas of genetic determinism – a flawed theory that suggests genes are the only reason we have certain abilities.

So-called “infidelity” tests are also highly problematic. With these, users can discreetly send in DNA samples of other people without their consent to supposedly find out whether their partner might be cheating.

Apart from being unethical and illegal in many countries (including Australia), the samples sent in would likely be taken from objects such as bed sheets or wine glasses, and are unlikely to be reliable.

Inaccurate results are just the start of the problem

Once your genetic data are in the hands of a company – with most market leaders based in the US – there’s a good chance they will stay there indefinitely. And unlike a bank PIN, you can’t just change your genetic code if something goes wrong.

Since we share a lot of our DNA with our relatives, disclosing our genomic data can create privacy risks for relatives, too. One 2018 study found many US citizens of European descent could be identified if their third cousin or closer had their DNA on an open-access or commercial database.

Then there’s the risk of data breaches at DNA testing companies. AncestryDNA, MyHeritage and the genetic genealogy site GedMatch have already been afflicted by such attacks.

Genetic information can also be used in criminal investigations, which means your data could be shared with law enforcement agencies. FamilyTreeDNA has shared data with the FBI in the past. Data can also be shared with immigration authorities and other government entities that may use your (or your relative’s) data against you.

Close up shot of a woman taking her own cheek swab — Although most of the commercial DNA testing companies are based in America, they still service people in Australia and New Zealand.
Shutterstock

Additionally, insurance companies may use someone’s genetic data to determine risks, coverage and premiums. In 2018 US biotech Orig3n partnered with Chinese e-insurance company ZhongAn Insurance.

Similarly, 23andMe has partnered with at least 14 pharmaceutical companies to research a range of diseases and develop new drugs. Through such partnerships, businesses benefit from consumers’ data without compensating them.

6 questions before clicking the purchase button

The lack of regulation in the personal genomics industry means it’s impossible to predict how your genetic data might be used. Before you buy a test, or if you know someone who plans to, consider these questions:

Given the sensitivity of the information and the risks involved, are you comfortable accepting the terms and conditions you (probably) haven’t read?
Many third parties may be interested in your genetic information. Are you happy for it to be shared with them?
Do you realise you don’t have the legal right to decide how long your personal data will be stored?
If you’re considering a test because of a health concern, did your doctor recommend it?
How would you respond if your ancestry results don’t match your sense of identity?
How would you feel if the company changed its policy and restricted your access to your own data?

Andelka M. Phillips has received funding from the Borrin Foundation to research the legal and policy implications of Consumer Data Rights in the context of genetic testing services. This article represents the authors views; the Borrin Foundation is not responsible for the content of this article and has not endorsed it.

Samuel Becher has received funding from the Borrin Foundation to research the legal and policy implications of Consumer Data Rights in the context of genetic testing services. This article represents the authors views; the Borrin Foundation is not responsible for the content of this article and has not endorsed it.

– ref. At-home DNA tests just aren’t that reliable – and the risks may outweigh the benefits – https://theconversation.com/at-home-dna-tests-just-arent-that-reliable-and-the-risks-may-outweigh-the-benefits-194349

What did pregnancy do to my gut? From nausea to constipation and farting

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vincent Ho, Senior Lecturer and clinical academic gastroenterologist, Western Sydney University

It’s two weeks after the birth of your healthy bub and you notice your gut isn’t feeling quite right. Maybe you feel a bit bloated. Maybe you’re farting more than usual.

What’s going on?

Pregnancy changes the structure and function of virtually every organ system, including some big changes to the gut. These changes can explain some common symptoms.

And no, you’re not imagining it. Some gut symptoms, such as constipation and gassiness, can hang around after you’ve given birth.

Nausea is common

The most common gut symptom in pregnancy is nausea, which affects up to 85% of women in the first trimester.

This is thought to be largely due to the effects of the hormone human chorionic gonadotropin.

Levels of the hormone are highest at the end of the first trimester and start to level off for the rest of the pregnancy. That explains why nausea tends to become less common as your pregnancy progresses.

Reflux can be painful

Other hormonal changes can lead you to develop another common symptom, reflux.

Levels of the hormone progesterone, for instance, steadily rise over the course of a pregnancy. This can lead to the oesophageal sphincter muscle – which is at the lower end of your food pipe, before it meets the stomach – to become more lax.

The loosening of this muscle makes it easier for stomach acid to move back up into the food pipe. This can cause a painful burning sensation in the upper part of your abdomen or just behind the breastbone.

Later in the pregnancy, your growing uterus and baby can start to really push up on your stomach.

This can also lead to reflux as direct pressure on the stomach forces stomach acid back into the food pipe.

Is constipation normal? And haemorrhoids?

Increased levels of progesterone and the hormone oestrogen lead to a decrease in muscular contractions (peristalsis) throughout the gut.

This means you’re more likely to become constipated during pregnancy. Constipation affects about 40% of pregnant women.

Pregnant women sitting on toilet, holding tummy — Constipation and haemorrhoids are common in pregnancy.
Shutterstock

Increased levels of oestrogen also lead to your blood vessels and connective tissue (tissue that connect one type to another, such as ligaments) becoming softer.

This, plus pressure from the growing baby, and increased blood volume and flow, can contribute to the development of haemorrhoids – columns of cushioned tissue and blood vessels found close to the opening of the anus.

Your body also needs more water and sodium in pregnancy to help produce amniotic fluid (liquid that surrounds the growing baby in the uterus) and build the blood supply of the growing baby. This necessary water and sodium is absorbed from your intestines and can contribute to constipation, and an increased risk of haemorrhoids.

Haemorrhoids are very common during pregnancy. One study found 86% of pregnant women reported them.

No wonder I feel full

Oestrogen is thought to be responsible for decreasing the movement of the stomach in pregnancy, keeping the food in the stomach longer and making it more likely you’ll feel full.

During the third trimester, your growing uterus and baby also start to really push up on the abdominal organs. No wonder you’re likely to feel pressure on your stomach and discomfort the closer you are to the end of your pregnancy.

You can also feel pressure at the other end of the gut. Pressure from the expanding uterus on the end part of the colon (the sigmoid colon) can also make you feel constipated even if you’re not.

I have incontinence. Is that because of how I gave birth?

There has been a lot of debate about whether urinary or faecal incontinence is more likely after a vaginal or a caesarean birth.

However, the strongest evidence we have suggests the mode of birth makes no difference. If you’ve had incontinence during pregnancy this is the strongest predictor of having it afterwards.

Urinary incontinence that doesn’t improve within three months of giving birth is more likely to persist. So if you’ve experienced this during pregnancy, you might like to see a pelvic floor physio.

Fortunately, faecal incontinence after pregnancy is very uncommon, affecting only around 3% of women. However if this persists, please seek medical attention.

Why am I still constipated?

A study from Finland on more than 400 women found constipation affected 47% of women in the first few days after a vaginal birth and 57% of women in the first few days after a caesarean.

The researchers suggested this may be caused by too much physical inactivity and insufficient intake of fluids after birth, or the effects of anaesthetic and disturbance to the intestines during surgery.

One month after childbirth, constipation became less common. Some 9% of women were constipated after a vaginal birth and 15% after a caesarean.

Feeling gassy? No, you’re not imaging it

The Finnish study also found excess farting is extremely common a few days after birth. It affected 81% of women but this number dropped to 30% one month after birth.

Bloating is another common symptom found a few days after birth affecting 59% of women, and this decreases to 14% of women one month afterwards.

So why is this happening? We can look to your gut microbiome for clues. This is the unique universe of micro-organisms (bugs), and their genes, that live in your gut.

Remind me again, what is the microbiome?

During and after pregnancy, there are profound changes to the gut microbiome. These may cause an increase in gas production or lead to constipation.

So the good news from the Finnish study is that normal bowel function is restored quickly after childbirth for most women, but might be a touch longer for women after a caesarean.

If you’re concerned about gut symptoms during or after pregnancy, seek advice from a health-care professional, who can discuss treatment and referral options.

Kate Levett receives funding from an NHMRC Early Career Fellowship.

Vincent Ho does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. What did pregnancy do to my gut? From nausea to constipation and farting – https://theconversation.com/what-did-pregnancy-do-to-my-gut-from-nausea-to-constipation-and-farting-193012

Underpaid at home, vulnerable abroad: how seasonal job schemes are draining Pacific nations of vital workers

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Apisalome Movono, Senior Lecturer in Development Studies, Massey University

The economic impact of COVID on Pacific Island states, combined with major labour shortages in Australia and New Zealand, has created a perfect storm. A mass exodus means Pacific nations are now losing crucial workers at such volume that their own development prospects are being undermined.

For 15 years we’ve been told Pacific seasonal labour schemes offer a “triple win” – for Pacific people wanting to earn decent incomes, for their home countries’ revenues and skill base, and for Australian and New Zealand horticulturalists desperate for workers.

Recent developments, however, suggest Pacific labour schemes need a major rethink.

Pacific peoples have long moved across oceans and the world in search of opportunities. But in 2007 New Zealand formalised arrangements with its Recognised Seasonal Employment (RSE) scheme. This was followed by two schemes in Australia, which in 2022 were merged to form the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) scheme.

Both countries target low- to semi-skilled workers, mainly for seasonal agricultural and horticultural work. The PALM scheme has since expanded to include hospitality, age care and tourism jobs. Predictably, supply has followed demand.

Supply and demand

The COVID-19 pandemic had a devastating effect on Pacific Island economies. For example, more than 100,000 Fijians lost their jobs, and the government lost half its tax revenue. Unsurprisingly, when borders began to open from late 2021, Pacific people queued for employment opportunities abroad.

This coincided with a severe labour shortage in a number of sectors in Australia and New Zealand. The New Zealand fruit industry, for example, didn’t meet forecast revenue and production levels in 2021, leading to an urgent call for new intakes of Pacific workers.

The subsequent rise in the RSE quota – from 14,400 in 2020-21 to 19,000 in 2022-23 – has seen more Pacific people than ever leave their own countries to work in New Zealand.

The total number of Samoan workers under the Australian and New Zealand work schemes, for example, doubled from 3,114 in 2019-20 to 6,600 in 2021-22. By this September, there were more than 29,000 PALM workers in Australia, with plans to increase this to 35,000 in 2023.

One-way traffic

The flip side is that Pacific Island businesses are now lamenting the loss of experienced and well-trained workers, especially in tourism. Cook Islands faced an acute loss of employees earlier this year, with 700 job vacancies reported in April.

More recently, 20 teachers from Samoa joined the fleet of 3,000 workers in Australian labour programmes. The resulting teacher shortage will be felt most by young people in the small nation. Similarly, Fiji has lost 40 mechanics to Australia’s temporary skilled work visa schemes between 2016 and 2021.

Vanuatu is also experiencing a labour shortage, with business owners saying they train employees only to see them leave for New Zealand and Australia. A shortage in chefs threatens the viability of restaurants, but picking fruit overseas can be more lucrative than working in hospitality at home.

The same is true in Fiji, which has lost hundreds of front-line tourism workers this year – receptionists, managers and waiters, as well as chefs – which may undermine the country’s efforts to rebuild its tourism industry.

These statistics challenge claims by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs that jobs programmes provide a “skills dividend to Pacific countries”.

Exploitation and poor conditions

The problem is part of a wider concern over Pacific labour schemes. For years, questions have been asked about whether such schemes truly live up to their aim of providing low-skilled workers with training and development opportunities as well as income.

As various commentators have noted, migrant work can have real implications for wellbeing due to long periods of separation from families, as well as mental and physical burnout.

With so many Pacific workers now overseas for long periods, these problems can have longer-term social costs. Recent research has detailed extramarital affairs, relationship breakdowns, emotional distress, parenting problems, and child welfare issues.

And while Pacific workers can undoubtedly benefit from seasonal employment overseas, there have been serious allegations in New Zealand this year about unacceptable working and living conditions. As one analysis put it, “Vulnerable workers are at risk of exploitation, underpay, and modern slavery conditions.”

Vanuatu’s government launched an enquiry after widespread complaints about treatment of its workers in Australia. Meanwhile, the Samoan government went so far as to temporarily stop seasonal worker flights after concerns were raised about the wellbeing and treatment of workers in Australia.

Improvement at home

While ensuring workers are properly taken care of under the PALM and RSE schemes, Pacific governments also need to look inwards. Their citizens will continue to seek opportunities abroad if they don’t feel they get a fair deal in their own labour markets.

RSE scheme workers are entitled to New Zealand’s minimum hourly wage of NZ$22.10. By comparison, Pacific wages are shockingly low. After a decade’s stagnation, for instance, Fiji has begun an incremental minimum wage increase – but this will only see the hourly rate rise from FJD$2.68 (NZ$1.96) to FJD$4.00 (NZ$2.92) in 2023.

As well, there are serious concerns about work conditions and employment rights in some countries. Recently, the Fiji Trade Union Congress was denied the right to protest for the fifth time.

These issues – on top of ongoing uncertainty around post-pandemic job security – will have to be addressed if the current cycle of richer economies siphoning off vulnerable workers from the Pacific is to be broken.

Better job opportunities and pathways in Pacific nations are not only vital to their economies, they’re also integral to the development of industries that will be resilient and sustainable in the future.

Apisalome Movono receives funding from the Royal Society Te Aparangi, Marsden Fast Start Grant

Regina Scheyvens receives funding from Royal Society Te Aparangi through a Marsden grant and James Cook Fellowship.

Leilani Faaiuaso does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Underpaid at home, vulnerable abroad: how seasonal job schemes are draining Pacific nations of vital workers – https://theconversation.com/underpaid-at-home-vulnerable-abroad-how-seasonal-job-schemes-are-draining-pacific-nations-of-vital-workers-194810

Paxlovid is Australia’s first-line COVID antiviral but Lagevrio also prevents severe disease in over-70s

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Benjamin Cowie, Director, WHO Collaborating Centre for Viral Hepatitis, The Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity

Australia is experiencing the fourth wave of COVID for 2022, with the number of people hospitalised with COVID trending to levels seen in winter and ongoing high levels of deaths. New COVID waves are expected to occur every three to four months for some time.

Earlier in the pandemic, COVID treatments mostly focused on those hospitalised with serious infection. Now, oral antiviral medicines nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) and molnupiravir (Lagevrio) are largely prescribed by GPs for people who test positive for COVID and are at greater risk of severe illness.

In our roles in Victoria’s Department of Health, we analysed the impact of antivirals on the risk of death and hospitalisation among Victorians aged 70 and over during the winter 2022 COVID wave.

Our analysis, which is yet to be published or independently verified by other scientists, found both Paxlovid and Lagevrio reduced the risk of hospitalisation and death. And the results were better for Paxlovid.

Several previous studies have shown Paxlovid is highly effective at preventing severe illness and death from COVID. It’s currently Australia’s first-line COVID antiviral treatment for early treatment in the community.

However, a recent trial has raised questions about the effectivness of the other antiviral available in Australia, Lagevrio. While there’s evidence it’s effective at treating COVID, it’s no longer recommended in the United Kingdom because it’s not considered cost-effective.

While Australia’s clinical guidelines are yet to change, our analysis suggests both Paxlovid and Lagevrio have a role to play in Australia’s treatment arsenal. Some people who are unable to have Paxlovid will benefit from Lagevrio.

Older person holds a positive RAT — People who can’t have Paxlovid can benefit from Lagevrio.
Shutterstock

How well do these antivirals work?

Initial clinical trials of Paxlovid and Lagevrio in unvaccinated adults show they significantly reduce the risk of hospitalisation or death from COVID.

Those who took Lagevrio were 30% less likely to be hospitalised or die with COVID.

In a separate trial, those that took Paxlovid were 89% less likely to be hospitalised or die.

Recently, a pre-print analysis (which is still undergoing external scientific review) reported on a large clinical trial in the United Kingdom. It found Lagevrio didn’t reduce hospitalisation or the risk of death for vaccinated adults (0.8%) compared to standard care.

It found treatment did reduce recovery time by four days. It also reduced contact with GP services, the time tests remained positive, and the amount of virus detected.

However it’s important to note the population studied in the UK trial were relatively young: 86% were aged 50–70. They were therefore at lower risk of severe COVID than the over-70s age group who represent most of those prescribed Lagevrio in Australia.

So the study may not have adequately demonstrated the potential benefit for older adults who are at higher risk of severe illness from COVID.

On the other hand, real-world (or observational) studies from Hong Kong, Israel and Poland have reported Lagevrio reduces the chance of high-risk patients dying from COVID.

Older people wearing masks go for a walk — Studies in older age groups report benefits from Lagevrio.
Shutterstock

Our analysis

We used our routine data and linkage techniques to examine the risk of hospitalisation in more than 27,000 Victorians aged over 70 years diagnosed with COVID and the risk of death in more than 32,000 people who did and didn’t undergo treatment.

This analysis involved collaboration between the Victorian and Australian government health departments, and linked Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) prescriptions, COVID vaccination, diagnoses, hospitalisation, and death data.

After controlling for various factors influencing the risk of hospitalisation and death (vaccination history, sex, socioeconomic status, hospitalisation history, and aged care residency), we found significant benefits for both drugs.

We found:

COVID medicines substantially reduced risk of hospitalisation (32% for Paxlovid, 26% for Lagevrio) and risk of death (72% for Paxlovid, 54% for Lagevrio)
early treatment with a COVID antiviral provided the greatest benefit – treatment with either drug within one day of diagnosis reduced the risk of hospitalisation by 37%, and death by 63%
the benefits for reducing the risk of hospitalisation were not seen if people were treated two or more days after diagnosis
the benefits for reducing the risk of death were not seen if treated four or more days after diagnosis.

Some important limitations of this analysis are that it’s observational, so we can’t control for a number of factors associated with hospitalisation and death from COVID.

Another limitation is the choice of antiviral medicine by the prescribing GP may be influenced by factors which are also associated with the risk of severe outcomes. This could bias the estimates of the treatment’s effect.

A strength of this analysis is the large size, and the fact it reports on the entire population of Victorians aged 70 years and above diagnosed with COVID during the winter wave.

So what does it mean?

In our analysis, the effect of Paxlovid was greater than that of Lagevrio. This is in keeping with the current available evidence and its recommendation as a first-line therapy.

However, Paxlovid is not safe for people with some underlying conditions, such as severe kidney or liver disease. It also has a number of drug interactions with commonly used medications.

So when Paxlovid is unsuitable or not available, Lagevrio is a suitable option.

Because Lagevrio has fewer interactions and can be used in a wider range of patients, it has been pre-placed in residential aged care, for rapid access.

Australians with lower socioeconomic status are more likely to be hospitalised with or die from COVID. So developing strategies to increase antiviral access for people who face the greatest burden of COVID will help reduce these inequities.

Antivirals are an important additional tool as part of an multi-layered response to COVID. This aims to reduce community transmission and the risk of illness in priority populations, and to protect our health system in the months to come and waves ahead of us.

Acknowledgements: The analysis mentioned above includes contributions from Daniel West, Indra Parta, Jose Canevari, Nick Haslett, Dennis Wollersheim, Marcellin Martinie and Rebecca Dawson from the Victorian Department of Health’s Modelling and Analytical Epidemiology team.

Benjamin Cowie is Acting Chief Health Officer at the Victorian Department of Health.

Brett Sutton is Victoria’s Chief Health Officer.

Christina Van Heer is a Senior Analyst at the Victorian Department of Health.

Suman Majumdar is a Deputy Chief Health Officer at the Victorian Department of Health.

– ref. Paxlovid is Australia’s first-line COVID antiviral but Lagevrio also prevents severe disease in over-70s – https://theconversation.com/paxlovid-is-australias-first-line-covid-antiviral-but-lagevrio-also-prevents-severe-disease-in-over-70s-195349

Newsletter: November 29 2022 – Items of interest and importance today

By Bryce Edwards -

November 29, 2022

New-Zealand-Parliament — New Zealand Parliament Buildings, Wellington, New Zealand.

New Zealand Politics Daily is a collation of the most prominent issues being discussed in New Zealand. It is edited by Dr Bryce Edwards of The Democracy Project.

Items of interest and importance today

POLITICAL FINANCE, PARLIAMENT, VOTING AGE
Thomas Coughlan (Herald): Big money donors get access to PMs and party leaders – report
Anna Whyte (Stuff): Political donations: Identity over $1,500 should be disclosed, new report recommends
Brent Edwards (NBR): Research reveals influence bought through political donations
Jem Traylen (BusinessDesk): Reform political donations before we become like the US – report (paywalled)
Thomas Coughlan (Herald): Six MPs creaming $140,000 in perks (paywalled)
Chris Trotter (Interest): Moderation + warmth is proving to be a winning political combination
Teana Macdonald (Herald): Let rangatahi lead the way (paywalled)

THREE WATERS AND ENTRENCHMENT CLAUSE
Chris Trotter (Daily Blog): Has Labour become a co-governed party?
Chris Trotter: If it ain’t broke, why fix it?
Thomas Coughlan (Herald): Labour moves to back down on Three Waters entrenchment clause, as advice shows MPs warned of constitutional problems a year ago
Thomas Manch (Stuff): The constitutional spat over a last-minute, controversial change to Three Waters bill
Amelia Wade (Newshub): Controversial Three Waters provision heading back to Parliament drawing board
Jamie Ensor (Neshub): Three Waters: Constitutional experts up in arms over ‘dangerous’ move supported by Government
Russell Palmer (RNZ): Cabinet to debate three waters anti-privatisation entrenchment – PM Jacinda Ardern
Thomas Manch (Stuff): Prime minister to discuss Three Waters entrenchment clause with political parties, due to constitutional risk
Herald Editorial: Three Waters reform hits a storm (paywalled)
Gordon Campbell: On entrenchment, and being ‘soft on crime’
Rachel Smalley (Today FM): Three Waters – Overturning ‘entrenched’ laws is much harder to do
Stephen Franks: How to repeal Labour/Green entrenchment of Water Services control by iwi elite
No Right Turn: Entrenching anti-privatisation
Martyn Bradbury (Daily Blog): Of course the Left have to ensure the Right won’t privatize the water

ECONOMY, BUSINESS, EMPLOYMENT
Lisa Marriott (The Conversation): As NZ workers and households tighten their belts, why not a windfall tax on corporate mega-profits too?
Dave Armstrong (Stuff): Kiwis, inflation is all your fault
Susan St John (Herald): No excuses for hungry children (paywalled)
Craig Renney and Diana Russell (Herald): Rebuilding Better: Time for a new Ministry and a state-owned investment bank (paywalled)
Tom Pullar-Strecker (Stuff): External member of Reserve Bank monetary committee says NZ ‘dodged a bullet’
Duncan Garner (NBR): Reserve Bank boss buries housing market (paywalled)
RNZ: Reserve Bank committee member addresses questions over role and OCR rise
Susan Edmunds (Stuff): Four measures that will indicate inflation is softening
David Hargreaves (Interest): Reserve Bank ‘hell bent on hiking rates to hurt households’
Mark Quinlivan (Newshub): Economist says Government might have ‘temptation’ to hike taxes as New Zealand tipped to plunge into recession
Duncan Garner (NBR): Reserve Bank boss buries housing market (paywalled)
Brent Melville (BusinessDesk): Home buyers paddle, as mortgage rates hit high water mark (paywalled)
RNZ: Depositors to benefit from end of funding for lending programme
Roger J Kerr (Interest): The monetary policy ‘penny-dropped’ in both Wellington and New York for the RBNZ and US Federal Reserve respectively last week
BusinessDesk: Retirement stocks jump after $200m govt funding boost
Rob Stock (Stuff): BNZ’s conduct code revealed: The consequences faced by naughty bankers
Daniel Smith (Stuff): What are your rights if you are asked to work over Christmas?
Janine Starks (Stuff): What is the ‘silver exodus’, and why is it happening?
Isaac Davison (Herald): Stuff journalists to strike after rejecting company’s pay offer (paywalled)
RNZ: Stuff staff to strike over pay
Tom Pullar-Strecker (Stuff): Stuff journalists to take industrial action

RETIREMENT
Rob Stock (Stuff): Raising NZ Super age would cause financial misery for over 65s – Retirement Commissioner says
Felix Walton (RNZ): Retirement Commission review suggests more people set to retire without a nest egg
Tamsyn Parker (Herald): Clearly inadequate: Retirement Commissioner calls for asset cap on accommodation supplement to rise from $8100 to $42,700
Nicholas Pointon (NBR): Retirement report: Superannuation ‘must remain’ at 65 (paywalled)
Ripu Bhatia (Stuff): Kaumātua saves for his own funeral to avoid burden on whānau

CRIME, POLICE
Finn Blackwell (RNZ): Dairy owners protest for tougher punishment of offenders
Jane Nixon (1News): Dairy protest extends to PM, deputy PM’s electorate offices
Newshub: Sandringham stabbing: Dozens gather outside PM Jacinda Ardern’s office to protest, dairies close as new crime package revealed
Rachel Smalley (Today FM): This Government doesn’t know what to focus on
Gianina Schwanecke (Stuff): Hundreds of Wellington dairies, small businesses close in protest after Sandringham stabbing
William Hewett (Newshub): Business owner calls for Ardern, Hipkins to do ‘undercover shift’ to see how ‘scared’ workers are
Jenna Lynch (Newshub): Government’s crime crackdown includes more funding for prevention tools, but not tougher penalties
1News: Govt’s retail crime package fails to address ‘crux of issue’ – National
Ella Morgan (Stuff): Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says she wants to keep dairy owners safe in the wake of Sandringham dairy stabbing
1News: Govt outlines multimillion-dollar package to help tackle retail crime
Glenn McConnell (Stuff): PM Jacinda Ardern announces new funding for dairies and shops needing crime protection
Herald: Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern says process of getting crime prevention methods into stores needs to be quicker
RNZ: Jacinda Ardern announces business support package targeted at dealing with crime
1News: Ardern rejects claims Government is ‘pro-criminal’
Andrea Vance and Iain McGregor (Stuff): A Crime of Convenience
RNZ: Police to broaden gang operation, revise policy on fleeing drivers – Commissioner Andrew Coster
Guyon Espiner (RNZ): Jerrim Toms inquest: Police say they had no other option than shoot and kill

ENVIRONMENT, RMA
Marc Daalder (Newsroom): Shaw successfully weakens own climate law
Jack Santa Barbara (Newsroom): The planetary emergency we must avoid (spoiler alert: it’s not climate change)
Ian Llewellyn (BusinessDesk): Govt moves towards owning a secondary carbon exchange (paywalled)
Brent Edwards (NBR): Act has plan to free up urban planning, protect environment (paywalled)

LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Simon Wilson (Herald): 50 days of Wayne and his focus is on the port (paywalled)
Tina Law (Press): Election complaint against Christchurch mayor Phil Mauger in the hands of police
Chris Lynch: Christchurch residents could face a rate increase of up to 9.5%
Rachael Kelly (Stuff): Gore mayor Ben Bell returns to work, stands firm on the decisions he has made
RNZ: Gore mayor Ben Bell resurfaces after week of ‘challenging discussions’

EDUCATION
Newshub: Marama Davidson, David Seymour clash over what’s a ‘legitimate’ reason for kids to miss school
Joseph Los’e (Herald): Willie Jackson: ‘Bumper sticker politics’ does not make for good, sensible policy
Caley Callahan (Newshub): Teachers’ union gives Government an ‘F’ on new collective agreement offer
Herald: Clinical training for teachers to ID students with mental health issues

PUBLIC SERVICE
Nikitin Sallee, Pattrick Smellie & Andy Fyers (BusinessDesk): Free, frank and political advice: the state of the public service (paywalled)
Andy Fyers (BusinessDesk): Public service workers say focus is too short-term (paywalled)
Alison McDonald (BusinessDesk): Immigration NZ committed to improving

HOUSING
Torika Tokalau (Stuff): Housing strategy launched to boost home ownership for Pacific people
Andrew Bevin (Newsroom): Hash out intensification funding or risk under-servicing communities
LIz McDonald (Stuff): Smaller homes than ever for Christchurch as units replace old houses

HEALTH
Murray Jones (BusinessDesk): Health ‘worse than abysmal’ on contract transparency
Emma Hatton (Newsroom): Parents of disabled children take fight to Court of Appeal
Niva Chittock (RNZ): General Practice leaders hit out at being excluded from pay parity package
Aimee Shaw (Stuff): Think food prices are high? Spare a thought for people with allergies

HATE SPEECH
Gavin Ellis: Hard call (but the right call) on hate speech
Anna Murray (Re:News): Hate speech laws: ‘It’s dangerous to leave queer people without protection’
Mandy Te Re (Re:News): Hate speech laws needed as attacks on queer community rise – advocate

OTHER
Todd Niall (Stuff): Auckland’s self-inflicted public transport crisis has urgent lessons
Pattrick Smellie (BusinessDesk): How NZ can warm up the new cold war (paywalled)
Jamie Mackay (Herald): What reception will PM Jacinda Ardern and Labour get at Fieldays? (paywalled)
Jacqueline Rowarth (Herald): Where’s The Finance?
Jem Traylen (BusinessDesk): Act party wants to ‘demolish’ work visa rules (paywalled)
Ian Llewellyn (BusinessDesk): Making electricity retailers pay for power cuts an option (paywalled)
Kiri Gillespie (Herald): Progress for NZ Land Wars project: Tauranga’s Gate Pā reserve to be reclassified
Lois Williams (Newsroom): Top marks for ageism and sexism
Lois Williams (Newsroom): Grey and in the way: Creative NZ decision met with disbelief
Anna Cottrell (Newsroom): When we booted out the real boot camp

When it comes to delivery drones, the government is selling us a pipe dream. Experts explain the real costs

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hannah Smith, Research Fellow, UWA Minderoo Tech & Policy Lab, Law School, The University of Western Australia

In early November, the Commonwealth Department of Infrastructure invited public comment on proposed Australia-wide “drone delivery guidelines” it has been quietly developing with industry stakeholders. A slick new website – drones.gov.au – boasts of the supposed benefits of delivery drones. It claims they will create jobs, provide cost-efficiency and be environmentally sustainable.

The draft guidelines focus on minimal technical considerations concerning land-use planning (suggesting no special accommodations need to be made for drones), and safety and noise issues. These issues matter, but they entirely overlook the stakes of permitting delivery drones to dominate our skies.

Then there’s the question of whether the purported benefits stand up to scrutiny. Our team at the University of Western Australia’s Minderoo Tech & Policy Lab has stress-tested the claims made in the department’s guidelines. This is what you need to know.

Delivery drone networks would be a huge deal

Drones hold a lot of promise in being able to substitute humans in dangerous or otherwise difficult (but important) work, such as emergency relief, aerial mustering and shark patrol. Commercial delivery drones, however, are an entirely different proposition.

The key player behind them is Wing Aviation, a subsidiary of Google’s holding company Alphabet Inc. Wing has selected Australia as its lead test-site for on-demand deliveries of coffee, roast chicken, Coke and chips. This is a public health and environmental catastrophe waiting to happen – not to mention a visceral (even violent) imposition on public space.

Wing has operated in select parts of the ACT since September 2017 and in Logan, Queensland, since September 2019. Despite subsidising every aspect of the operations, creating zero cost for both merchants and consumers, it has not escaped complaints. Concerns have ranged from noise and safety complaints, to impacts on wildlife, pets and privacy.

Wing had to cease operations in Bonython after extensive protest from residents. Residents in Logan have reported being unsettled by neighbours receiving up to eight noisy deliveries per hour.

Cities around the world are seeking alternatives to freeways – acknowledging how road infrastructure contributes to social inequality, pollution and reduced quality of life. Do we want to replicate these problems in our skies?

Clear blue skies above a beach — Are we willing to give up our clear blue skies for ten minute food deliveries?
Shutterstock

The benefits of delivery drones are unproven

The guidelines emphasise the economic and eco-promise of a drone-filled future. A projected A$14.5 billion added to Australia’s GDP and 10,000 jobs over the next 20 years is undeniably attractive. But does the evidence add up to this rosy vision?

The numbers cited in the guidelines actually come from an October 2020 report prepared by Deloitte Access Economics for the Department of Infrastructure.

Crucially, the report aggregates multiple markets for drone use, well beyond just delivery. In the Deloitte report, the segment of the drone market for military and industrial applications is estimated to grow to more than $5.5 billion, while the food delivery market, at $0.26 billion, is at best 20 times smaller. It appears military and industrial applications drive the bold economic estimates found in the guidelines – yet the department doesn’t mention them.

Also, the 2020 report caveats if its predictions of market expansion change, so too will its economic analysis. Australia’s highest inflation rate in more than 30 years, coupled with a global economic slowdown, and worsening business confidence suggests Deloitte’s predictions are perhaps on shaky grounds.

The fragility of the economic promise is matched by equally shallow claims of environmental sustainability. There is a shrewd focus on “last-mile delivery emissions” to demonstrate drones’ green credentials. But this ignores the emissions generated along the entire logistics chain of this complex, technology-heavy system.

There are compounding emissions created by additional warehousing and the power needs of drones – and that’s before we even consider the explosion in single-use packaging, as reusable coffee cups and containers languish at the back of the cupboard.

Drones of indulgence, not necessity

The guidelines state drones deliver “on-demand supplies”. This raises the question: demanded by whom? Barely a fortnight ago Deliveroo went into voluntary administration in Australia, citing “challenging economic conditions”.

“On-demand supplies” is a loaded description that conflates necessity with desire – blurring essential medication with donuts. This descriptive sleight of hand casts drones as an all-or-nothing offering, which is of course untrue.

One can support Australia’s only other approved delivery drone operator, the regional medical supplier Swoop Aero, without having to tolerate repeat junk-food deliveries whizzing by to the neighbours down the street.

Citizens’ approval should be essential

In 2002, Australia became the first country to regulate civilian drone use. The intervening 20 years have afforded the drone industry multiple opportunities to influence the regulatory process, mostly beyond the public eye. Delivery drones necessitate an entirely different conversation.

In 2019, some unsuspecting Canberrans only discovered they were guinea pigs in a food delivery drone trial when the drones began to appear on their neighbour’s doorsteps. They then found out the company responsible, Google Wing, also runs the public feedback process on behalf of the government. Such events do not deliver the transparency and impartiality demanded of government decision-making.

Drones demand an open and expansive discussion about the vital, living habitat above our heads. We must resist empty promises and indulgence, and centre the much broader needs of all living things.

Google has an ambition to use Australia as its laboratory to develop the future of drone deliveries, before exporting it abroad. Australians have a chance to turn this plan on its head. Submissions for feedback on the draft guidelines close on December 2. After that, you can have your say here.

The UWA Minderoo Tech & Policy Lab receives unrestricted gift funding from Australian charitable foundation, Minderoo Foundation.

– ref. When it comes to delivery drones, the government is selling us a pipe dream. Experts explain the real costs – https://theconversation.com/when-it-comes-to-delivery-drones-the-government-is-selling-us-a-pipe-dream-experts-explain-the-real-costs-195361

Chasing future biotech solutions to climate change risks delaying action in the present – it may even make things worse

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tessa Hiscox, Microbiology PhD Candidate, University of Canterbury

The world is under growing pressure to find sustainable options to cut emissions or lessen the impacts of climate change.

Technology entrepreneurs from around the globe claim to have the solutions – not just yet, but soon. The biotech sector in particular is now using climate change as an urgent argument for more government funding, public support and fewer regulatory hurdles for their industry.

But the urgency of climate change creates greater risk of superficial claims and actions. In our new research, we describe how the current “technology push” cycle perpetually promises to rescue humanity from climate change, and in doing so, delays real progress.

The pipeline for salvation technology is long and the benefit is hypothetical. Like the character Wimpy from Popeye, technology developers want their hamburger today but will pay back society with climate solutions on some future Tuesday.

Climate change is an existential threat, but it is only one of many symptoms of environmental damage we’ve caused. Humanity has pushed Earth beyond multiple boundary limits and the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is merely one indicator of the many excesses of human activity.

Technology solutions not only rarely lead to sustainable solutions, they may exacerbate harm. Lulled into complacency by “technological imaginaries”, we wait too long to enact difficult but effective solutions.

Tech solutions only address symptoms

Biotechnologies could make valuable contributions to halting or ameliorating the impacts of climate change. Contributions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions or better adapt plants to the changing climate would help. However, these address the symptoms, not the cause of environmental degradation.

Climate change is an “attractive” problem because there are so many technological ways to solve it. That quality makes societies vulnerable to the siren song of technology pushers.

For example, if climatic change is described as a threat to food production, then technologies that promise to increase food production despite climate change would be appealing. One such prospect is to increase photosynthesis. Genetic modification of the key enzyme in photosynthesis (RuBisCO) could improve its binding of carbon dioxide. More plant biomass might be the result.

A leave against the sun — Gene-editing technologies used to increase the rate of photosynthesis may not raise crop yield.
Shutterstock/Chyrko Olena

However, increased photosynthesis may not increase yield, nutritional value or micronutrient levels in crops. Even if this approach worked outside of the laboratory, the plants would be no less vulnerable to increasingly frequent drought and flood stresses. These plants will also demand more nitrogen fertiliser, leading to more greenhouse gas emissions.

Maybe we could have more biomass, but not better or more food for people. Some of our crops could make better use of the additional carbon in the atmosphere, but lack of access to sufficient and desirable food would continue. By not addressing this fundamental problem, we will need more crops and livestock, undermining any efficiency gains.

Technologies are not alternatives to action

Implementing such technologies also prolongs colonial dependence on wealthier countries and overlooks the rights and inputs of Indigenious and local peoples.

Identifying the fundamental social goal, rather than the proximate technological objective, is essential to achieving sustainability. “Goal pull” rather than “technology push” approaches do this.

Climate change is a symptom of environmental degradation and the multifarious complexities of poverty. These are wicked problems societies find hard to address, driving up the appeal of technologies as alternatives to action. The market is good at trading in technological futures.

Try recasting the goal as food security, measured through indicators of reduced hunger across the world. Governments now have at their disposal solutions that include both social and technological options.

For example, reducing food waste such that more nutritious food reaches people who need it reduces demand to produce more food in the first place. Food waste alone will create 5.7–7.9 gigatonnes of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The excess nitrogen used in agriculture to produce food is also a significant source of the greenhouse gas nitrous oxide.

Reducing food waste depends on detailed planning to make use of technologies that are useful by design rather than opportunity. More indiscriminate production may result in competition with food. For example, excess corn production in the US resulted in much of the corn being used for non-food purposes such as bio-ethanol, despite the intensive use of resources required to produce these calories.

A red barn in the middle of a corn field — Corn is used for non-food purposes such as biofuels.
Shutterstock/christianthiel.net

Failure to meet the goal of feeding more people also provides useful feedback either about the adequacy of the strategy or the chosen measures. For example, if available calories increased but nutrition did not improve, it might be because farmers need support to develop polycultures, or healthier options should be made more accessible.

The goal pull approach takes us to feedback-optimised combinations of social and technological innovation that solve root problems.

To save a patient’s life it may be necessary to treat the symptoms of the disease. We are forced into the same situation with climate change. Nevertheless, we must not use the immediacy of climate change to put off breaking habits that will lead to future environmental and social catastrophe.

Tessa Hiscox receives PhD scholarships from the University of Canterbury and the Ministry for Primary Industries.

Jack Heinemann receives funding from public agencies, charities and non-governmental organisations. He is affiliated with the American Society for Microbiology, European Network of Scientists for Social Responsibility and New Zealand Microbiological Society. He has served as an expert witness for court cases relevant to biotechnology.

– ref. Chasing future biotech solutions to climate change risks delaying action in the present – it may even make things worse – https://theconversation.com/chasing-future-biotech-solutions-to-climate-change-risks-delaying-action-in-the-present-it-may-even-make-things-worse-194147

Why does night shift increase the risk of cancer, diabetes and heart disease? Here’s what we know so far

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Frederic Gachon, Associate Professor, Physiology of Circadian Rhythms, Institute for Molecular Bioscience, The University of Queensland

Shift work means businesses and organisations can be productive for 24-hours a day. It was initially adopted to protect camps or cities against predators, enemies or disasters.

Since the industrial revolution and the development of artificial lighting, manufacturing, service and retail sectors have used shift work to increase productivity and profitability, and provide continuous health care and emergency services.

Around 20% of the workforce are now shift workers, with 25-30% of those working nights.

But working when you’re supposed to sleep and rest disrupts your normal physiology.

More cancer, heart attacks and diabetes

Before the 1990s, little was known about the impact of shift work on health.

Then a landmark study using clinical data from the mid-1990s found nurses working at night had an increased risk of breast cancer. This risk increased with the number of years spent performing shift work.

This and other studies led the International Agency for Research on Cancer to conclude in 2007 that night shift work should be classified as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A), meaning experts suspect it increases the chance of cancer. This statement was confirmed in 2019.

Since then, studies have shown shift work, particularly rotating shift work, also increases the risk of heart disease, obesity and type 2 diabetes, dementia, and overall premature death.

It is also associated with decreased alertness and a higher risk of accidents.

Man in a factory — Shift work is linked to more accidents.
Unsplash/Sam Moghadam

What’s behind the increased risk?

Growing evidence points to the disruption of the circadian clock caused by being active or awake at night when we are supposed to sleep.

During evolution, living species – from bacteria and plants to humans – have acquired a circadian clock to optimise bodily processes in an environment that changes throughout the day.

Consequently, almost all aspects of behaviour, physiology and metabolism are rhythmically organised to anticipate these daily changes.

Muscle strength, the immune system, and cognitive performances, for example, are higher during the day when the body is also storing nutrients from food. These functions decrease in the night when the body starts to use the stored nutrients during this period of fasting.

These circadian clocks are present in almost every cell of our organism. The central clock in the brain acts as a kind of conductor of an orchestra that synchronises all these clocks and is synchronised every day by the environmental light.

Clock on a wall — All systems in our body are synchronised.
Unsplash/Renel Wackett

If these clocks now get input from other sources like food at night, or if the conductor gets distracted with something like light during the night, this synchrony gets lost.

This leads to increased weight gain, type 2 diabetes, increased blood pressure, and compromised immune response. This is seen even in cases of low-intensity light in the bedroom such as a TV screen.

In studies using animal models, this lost synchronicity leads to an increased incidence of breast cancer and faster tumour growth. It also exacerbates the symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease in studies of mice.

Why does the circadian disruption wreak so much havoc?

There is no simple explanation, and it likely involves multiple components.

Like in animal models, the disruption of the well-organised physiology caused by light at night or feeding at the wrong time disturbs the organs’ natural function, particularly the capacity to store and use nutrients during the proper period.

Woman working on supermarket checkout — Light and food at night affects how our body uses and stores nutrients.
Shutterstock

Circadian disruption is also associated with a disturbance of the autonomous nervous system that orchestrates our basic functions like breathing or keeping our heart beating. This impacts the connection between the brain and surrounding tissues, and their proper function.

Finally, shift-work simulation in humans showed an impact on the immune system. This contributes to a higher risk of infection among shift workers, notably COVID, and could also play a role in cancer progression.

Altogether, this contributes to a globally increased predisposition to several illnesses, including cancer diabetes and heart disease.

The circadian clock also plays a critical role in the efficacy and toxicity of most drugs, including cancer chemotherapy. And a sustained circadian rhythm impacts the response to treatments.

What can we do about it?

The first step should be to limit rotating shift work as much as possible. While people can adapt to work at the “wrong” time to some extent, it’s impossible to adapt to schedules that constantly change.

Several trials studying the impact of lighting showed bright light increases alertness during the night and help the organisms to adapt to night work by shifting the phase of the circadian clock. However the long-term impact on health is still to be determined.

Controlling and limiting the time during which people are eating (for example ten hours during the day and not eating overnight) appears to be a promising approach that could be beneficial for heart and metabolic health, and seems compatible with shift work. It also reduces tumour growth in animal studies of breast cancer.

However, there is no optimal solution. A reasonable approach would be to limit shift work to essential services (hospital, emergency services, and so on) and reverse the global trend towards a 24-hour society to decrease shift work for better health.

Frederic Gachon has received funding from the French Institute for Medical Research and Health (INSERM: 2006-2008), the Swiss National Science Foundation (2010-2012), the European Research Council (2011- 2015) and the Leenaards Foundation (2012-2014). He also worked for Nestlé (2012-2017) where he received industry funding.

– ref. Why does night shift increase the risk of cancer, diabetes and heart disease? Here’s what we know so far – https://theconversation.com/why-does-night-shift-increase-the-risk-of-cancer-diabetes-and-heart-disease-heres-what-we-know-so-far-190652

COP27 was disappointing, but 2022 remains an historic year for international climate policy

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Lake, Research Associate at the Centre for Resources, Energy and Environmental Law, The University of Melbourne

This year’s global climate negotiations at the COP27 in Egypt were disappointing. In particular, the international commitment to limit planetary warming to 1.5℃ remains on “life support”.

But hope is not lost. In fact, 2022 was an historic year for international climate policy. It marked a shift in how the world’s biggest greenhouse gas emitters – China, the United States, the European Union and India – deal with climate change when faced with economic and energy shocks.

In the past, climate action has been pushed to the back-burner when governments devise policy responses to global crises. But this year, amid Russia’s war on Ukraine, spiralling inflation and energy shortages, tackling climate change has been central to recovery plans.

It signals climate action and economic stability are no longer seen as competing priorities – instead, national governments realise they go hand-in-hand. As European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has noted, this represents a major turning point in global climate policy and a “leap into the future”.

crowd calls for climate action — Climate change has been central to the recovery plans of the world’s biggest economies.
Peter Dejong/AP

A global turning point

Russia’s illegal war on Ukraine has destabilised the global energy market and caused sharp rises in food and commodity prices, worsening global inflation.

In the past, such shocks would have prompted governments to enact a fairly blinkered policy response.

During the 1970s global oil crisis, for example, the governments brought in massive fossil fuel subsidies and eased environmental rules for the petroleum industry, rather than reduce oil dependency.

In the aftermath of the global financial crisis in 2008, government responses were often similarly short-sighted. Low-interest loans to banks and other institutions, for example, perpetuated a business-as-usual economic system of high emissions.

This was coupled with years of austerity which derailed funding and investment for climate action.

Hearteningly, 2022 has seen a very different approach.

The United States, European Union, China and India have all prioritised climate change in their response to global economic crises, as I outline below.

Why? Public support for climate action is ever-growing and climate-related disasters are becoming worse. What’s more, renewable energy costs continue to fall, and energy security and global competitiveness remain big concerns.

The EU and US step up

In the immediate aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the EU made a “dash for gas” to replace Russian supply. Germany made deals to purchase gas from African countries, Australia, the US and Middle East, triggering fears climate action would be delayed.

But the EU has since made climate change action a central priority. Its RePowerEU plan, released in May, presents clean energy as the solution to the so-called energy trilemma of costs, security and environmental sustainability.

woman stands at lectern next to sign reading 'United Nations climate change' — The EU has made climate change action a central priority. Pictured: European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
Peter Dejong/AP

Among other measures, the plan involves:

ramped-up targets for renewable energy and energy efficiency
substantial home and business electrification measures including electric vehicles and heat pumps
ambitious targets for green hydrogen.

The plan intends to eliminate reliance on Russian gas by 2027 and almost halve overall gas use by 2030.

The US took similar action this year. Its historic Inflation Reduction Act puts clean energy investment at the forefront of plans to address the cost-of-living crisis.

At least US$369 billion will be spent on clean energy initiatives to reduce energy bills. Clean energy will be embedded in measures across the economy through tax incentives, subsidies and grants. The investment prompted one observer to predict “the climate economy is about to explode”.

By aligning climate change with economic policy, the government has shifted the business narrative from risk to opportunity.

This month the Biden administration went further, with a proposal for major government suppliers to disclose greenhouse gas emissions and set science-based emissions reduction targets. Climate change is also being considered in US pension plans and company reporting requirements.

By embedding climate change in existing systems, trillions of dollars will shift into clean energy. This is likely to change the US economy forever and accelerate emissions reduction.

man insult walks in front of cars under sign reading 'A future made in America' — US President Joe Biden’s climate policies include measures to encourage electric vehicles.
Evan Vucci/AP

Progress in China and India

So what about the developing economies of China and India?

In China, coal use increased in the short-term over winter this year. However, China’s government has released plans for specific sectors coupling economic, energy security and low carbon growth.

In July, the government released an emissions reduction blueprint for urbanisation and rural development. It includes ambitious measures to increase the energy efficiency of buildings, electrify buildings and transport (including huge deployment of electric vehicle charging stations) and mandate rooftop solar on new factories and public buildings.

The government has also worked closely with provincial governments on targets to more than double the installed capacity of wind and solar by 2025.

In India, a National Electricity Plan released by the central government this year has clean energy at its core. It means renewables capacity is set to soar by 250% over the next decade.

India’s government has also introduced policies to favour electrification in buildings and transport – a departure from a previous policy in which gas played a significant role in future energy supply.

man sits in front of bags of coal — India’s electricity plan would reduce reliance on fossil fuels.
Rajanish Kakade/AP

Change is afoot

Analysis suggests the systemic changes outlined above could mean the EU, China and India exceed their current commitments under the Paris Agreement.

This is good news – but the world still has a long way to go. Climate action must be embedded deeply in the government policies of all nations, as well as in existing economic and energy systems. This is no small task – but it’s necessary to achieve the transformation required to address the climate crisis.

Of course, 2022 was also a big year for climate action in Australia. The Albanese Labor government was elected in May, and has set about implementing a climate action agenda far stronger than that of the previous Coalition government.

Australia still lags behind other comparable nations. But recent developments in the EU and US offer lessons on the way forward.

Katherine Lake does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. COP27 was disappointing, but 2022 remains an historic year for international climate policy – https://theconversation.com/cop27-was-disappointing-but-2022-remains-an-historic-year-for-international-climate-policy-195288

Out of the coffin and the closet: gay vampires are no longer sub-text, they’re just text

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Naja Later, Academic Tutor in Media and Communications, Swinburne University of Technology

There’s always been something queer about vampires. Vampire stories are traditionally rife with dark desires and invisible secrets from their early canonisation in popular culture. But what happens when the subtext becomes the text, and vampires come out of closets as well as coffins?

In the golden age of streaming television, there’s no shortage of queer vampire stories. AMC’s new Interview with the Vampire series is the latest in a wave, riding the success of FX’s bisexual bloodsucker mockumentary What We Do In The Shadows and Netflix’s teen lesbian series First Kill.

Interview With The Vampire revisits Anne Rice’s 1976 novel and Neil Jordan’s 1995 film adaptation of the same name through a modern lens, suggesting the lack of open queerness in the earlier iterations were the result of unreliable narrators. When the titular vampire Louis reunites in the modern day with his human interviewer Daniel, he explains that the original interviews omitted the romantic nature of the relationship to his vampire maker.

Queer-coding monsters is nothing new: monster stories are often allegories for social outcasts of one kind or another. Vampires have been used as metaphors for xenophobia, antisemitism, and class tension, but queerness has always been an especially popular interpretation. They are androgynous creatures of the night. They can be predatory or tragic, craving human flesh in forbidden ways. If you’re inclined toward psychoanalysis, the conflicting imagery of penetrating teeth and sucking mouths is easy to interpret as sexual innuendo.

In media and societies where queer intimacy cannot be safely portrayed, vampires have offered queer audiences coded representations of taboo sexualities and gender performances.

Sex, violence and perversion

There are many vampire mythologies around the world, but their affinity for queerness really coalesced in the late 1800s with Gothic novels. Sheridan Le Fanu’s Carmilla in 1872 portrayed a young woman seduced by an aristocratic vampire. Bram Stoker, a closeted gay man, was heavily influenced by Le Fanu when he wrote Dracula in 1897.

Vampires remained popular in the public consciousness of the 20th century West. Germany’s Weimar Republic, a sexually progressive period between the world wars, produced a number of influential vampire films including Nosferatu (1922) and Vampyr (1932) – made by a gay director and star, respectively.

A famous still from the 1922 film, Nosferatu.
Wikimedia

American vampire films struggled with Hollywood’s repressive Hays Code, a censorship system enforced from the 1930s-1960s that forbade sex, violence, or any form of “perversion”. Still, Bela Lugosi and the British Hammer horror films embraced the camp overtones necessary to slide past censors.

Meanwhile, bloodsucking women thrived on television: Vampira hosted a titular show from 1954-1955 and Lily Munster was the vampire housewife of The Munsters (1964–1966). Critics have pointed out a distinct lesbian sensibility to the high-femme stylings of Gothic matriarchs, even on the squeaky-clean small screen.

In the heyday of 1970s exploitation films, openly erotic productions like Vampyros Lesbos and Blacula (1972) thrived. By the 1980s, everybody knew what vampires really stood in for. Tony Scott’s The Hunger (1983) was brazenly bisexual. 1987 was a bumper year with Joel Schumaker’s The Lost Boys and Kathryn Bigelow’s Near Dark stylising the alternative vampire covens as dangerous but enticing queer communities.

Anne Rice and pulp

Meanwhile, vampires were a staple in pulp literature. Anne Rice’s Vampire Chronicles embedded complex and ambiguous erotic relationships in early novels, which grew into openly queer dynamics in her later work.

Paranormal queer literature is a thriving sub-genre in publishing: Fledgling by Octavia Butler, Certain Dark Things by Silvia Moreno-Garcia, Jewell Gomez’ Gilda Stories, and Rebekah Weatherspoons’ Vampire Sororitiy Sisters series are popular examples. Even the Twilight series, which might seem like the pinnacle of heterosexual culture, relies on the vampire as a metaphor for repressed sexual desire. Twilight depends on our historic understanding that blood is not what vampires really want.

With a heavy weight of history, 2022’s Interview with the Vampire finally makes the subtext text. It’s a risky move: when a character says “there’s an elephant in this room”, there’s no showmanship in watching them tiptoe around it. But unlike the vampires themselves, queerness doesn’t crumble on exposure to the harsh light of day. Instead, representing the implicit intimacy between the vampires allows the show to explore deeper, thornier problems around public appearances, interracial relationships, and destructive codependency.

Queer representation in mainstream media is owed to the hard-won campaigns for public acceptance. There are affirmative examples like Heartstopper and Queer Eye that give queer people the wholesome happy endings they were so long denied. But of course queer audiences have baggage: for so long queer audiences had to embrace monsters as their champions, interpret violence as a stand-in for intimacy, and brace for relationships ending in destruction.

Queer people have grown to love dark and difficult stories that often mythologise the secrecy and struggles of our real lives. It can be hard to identify with de-fanged versions of the queer experience.

Naja Later does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Out of the coffin and the closet: gay vampires are no longer sub-text, they’re just text – https://theconversation.com/out-of-the-coffin-and-the-closet-gay-vampires-are-no-longer-sub-text-theyre-just-text-195011

Where did the Earth’s oxygen come from? New study hints at an unexpected source

By The Conversation -

November 29, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Mole, Postdoctoral fellow, Earth Sciences, Laurentian University

The amount of oxygen in the Earth’s atmosphere makes it a habitable planet.

Twenty-one per cent of the atmosphere consists of this life-giving element. But in the deep past — as far back as the Neoarchean era 2.8 to 2.5 billion years ago — this oxygen was almost absent.

So, how did Earth’s atmosphere become oxygenated?

Our research, published in Nature Geoscience, adds a tantalizing new possibility: that at least some of the Earth’s early oxygen came from a tectonic source via the movement and destruction of the Earth’s crust.

The Archean Earth

The Archean eon represents one third of our planet’s history, from 2.5 billion years ago to four billion years ago.

This alien Earth was a water-world, covered in green oceans, shrouded in a methane haze and completely lacking multi-cellular life. Another alien aspect of this world was the nature of its tectonic activity.

On modern Earth, the dominant tectonic activity is called plate tectonics, where oceanic crust — the outermost layer of the Earth under the oceans — sinks into the Earth’s mantle (the area between the Earth’s crust and its core) at points of convergence called subduction zones. However, there is considerable debate over whether plate tectonics operated back in the Archean era.

One feature of modern subduction zones is their association with oxidized magmas. These magmas are formed when oxidized sediments and bottom waters — cold, dense water near the ocean floor — are introduced into the Earth’s mantle. This produces magmas with high oxygen and water contents.

Our research aimed to test whether the absence of oxidized materials in Archean bottom waters and sediments could prevent the formation of oxidized magmas. The identification of such magmas in Neoarchean magmatic rocks could provide evidence that subduction and plate tectonics occurred 2.7 billion years ago.

The experiment

We collected samples of 2750- to 2670-million-year-old granitoid rocks from across the Abitibi-Wawa subprovince of the Superior Province — the largest preserved Archean continent stretching over 2000 km from Winnipeg, Manitoba to far-eastern Quebec. This allowed us to investigate the level of oxidation of magmas generated across the Neoarchean era.

Dr. Xuyang Meng collecting a rock sample in Rouyn-Noranda, Que. — The 2750- to 2670-million-year-old granitoid rocks collected from the largest preserved Archean continent may help reveal the origin story of the Earth’s oxygen.
(Dylan McKevitt), Author provided

Measuring the oxidation-state of these magmatic rocks — formed through the cooling and crystalization of magma or lava — is challenging. Post-crystallization events may have modified these rocks through later deformation, burial or heating.

So, we decided to look at the mineral apatite which is present in the zircon crystals in these rocks. Zircon crystals can withstand the intense temperatures and pressures of the post-crystallization events. They retain clues about the environments in which they were originally formed and provide precise ages for the rocks themselves.

Small apatite crystals that are less than 30 microns wide — the size of a human skin cell — are trapped in the zircon crystals. They contain sulfur. By measuring the amount of sulfur in apatite, we can establish whether the apatite grew from an oxidized magma.

Map of Canada showing the location of the Superior Province in the east of the country. — Map of the Superior Province that stretches from central Manitoba to eastern Quebec in Canada.
(Xuyang Meng), Author provided

We were able to successfully measure the oxygen fugacity of the original Archean magma — which is essentially the amount of free oxygen in it — using a specialized technique called X-ray Absorption Near Edge Structure Spectroscopy (S-XANES) at the Advanced Photon Source synchrotron at Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois.

Creating oxygen from water?

We found that the magma sulfur content, which was initially around zero, increased to 2000 parts per million around 2705 million years. This indicated the magmas had become more sulfur-rich. Additionally, the predominance of S6+ — a type of sulfer ion — in the apatite suggested that the sulfur was from an oxidized source, matching the data from the host zircon crystals.

These new findings indicate that oxidized magmas did form in the Neoarchean era 2.7 billion years ago. The data show that the lack of dissolved oxygen in the Archean ocean reservoirs did not prevent the formation of sulfur-rich, oxidized magmas in the subduction zones. The oxygen in these magmas must have come from another source, and was ultimately released into the atmosphere during volcanic eruptions.

We found that the occurrence of these oxidized magmas correlates with major gold mineralization events in the Superior Province and Yilgarn Craton (Western Australia), demonstrating a connection between these oxygen-rich sources and global world-class ore deposit formation.

Oxygen — The driving of ocean water deep into the Earth, caused by the sliding of oceanic plates under the Earth’s continental plates, may generate free oxygen as well as the mechanism to release it — volcanoes.
(Shutterstock)

The implications of these oxidized magmas go beyond the understanding of early Earth geodynamics. Previously, it was thought unlikely that Archean magmas could be oxidized, when the ocean water and ocean floor rocks or sediments were not.

While the exact mechanism is unclear, the occurrence of these magmas suggests that the process of subduction, where ocean water is taken hundreds of kilometres into our planet, generates free oxygen. This then oxidizes the overlying mantle.

Our study shows that Archean subduction could have been a vital, unforeseen factor in the oxygenation of the Earth, the early whiffs of oxygen 2.7 billion years ago and also the Great Oxidation Event, which marked an increase in atmospheric oxygen by two per cent 2.45 to 2.32 billion years ago.

As far as we know, the Earth is the only place in the solar system — past or present — with plate tectonics and active subduction. This suggests that this study could partly explain the lack of oxygen and, ultimately, life on the other rocky planets in the future as well.

David Mole received funding from Canada First Research Excellence Fund (CFREF) and additional federal, provincial, and industry partners as part of the Metal Earth project; a Canadian geoscience research program led by Laurentian University. The $104-million dollar project started in 2016, and is transforming our understanding of the genesis of base and precious metal deposits during Earth’s evolution. This initiative has created a strategic consortium of allied Canadian and international researchers, government, and industry. The Metal Earth grant project # is CFREF-2015-00005. David currently works for Geoscience Australia, who were not involved in this work.

Adam C. Simon received funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation EAR grants #2214119 and 1924142.

Xuyang Meng receives funding from Canada First Research Excellence Fund (CFREF-2015-00005), Natural Science Foundation of China, U.S. National Science Foundation EAR, and a doctoral scholarship from China Scholarship Council.

– ref. Where did the Earth’s oxygen come from? New study hints at an unexpected source – https://theconversation.com/where-did-the-earths-oxygen-come-from-new-study-hints-at-an-unexpected-source-191673

Protests against strict COVID-zero policy are sweeping China. It’s anyone’s guess what happens now

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David S G Goodman, Director, China Studies Centre, Professor of Chinese Politics, University of Sydney

Public protests in China related to the government’s COVID-19 restrictions have hit the news worldwide over the weekend, following a fatal apartment fire in Urumqi, Xinjiang last week which killed ten people.

Many internet users claimed some residents could not escape because the apartment building was partially locked down, though authorities denied this.

There have been reports some demonstrators have called for President Xi Jinping, the newly re-elected General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, to stand down. Others have criticised the rule of the party itself.

China’s COVID measures are among the strictest in the world, as it continues to pursue lockdowns to suppress the virus – what it calls a “dynamic zero COVID” policy.

While these protests are certainly serious challenges to authority, they should be kept in perspective. In particular, there’s no real parallel to those in Tiananmen Square in 1989. These are street protests where the demonstrators disperse after marching and protesting, and the main focus of the protests are the COVID restrictions rather than wider political principles.

The main issue here is frustration not just with COVID restrictions, but the inconsistent ways these measures are being implemented.

At least in the short-term, the state’s reactions are likely to be muted. There’s undoubtedly pressure for change, though how this will be achieved is hard to predict.

A more national response

Protests in China have actually become quite common in the last couple of decades, though they almost always centre around a specific issue and are highly localised.

Workers in a factory may protest over lack of payment or deteriorating conditions. Villagers forced to resettle so that their land can be redeveloped attempt resistance, sometimes even to the extent of refusing to be moved away. Residents in new housing estates become mobilised to complain about the lack of promised roads, retail outlets and services.

These kinds of protest are usually resolved reasonably and quickly not least by state officials intervening to ensure solutions in the name of maintaining stability.

Less capable of such instant solution are protests about more general principles, such as freedom of expression, legal representation, or governmental responsibilities. In such cases, government responses have tended to suppress the concerns.

But such protests have almost always been localised and not led to any sense of a regional or national movement. This has even been true of industrial disputes where workers have protested in one or more factories under a single brand or owner.

There’s no evidence at this stage that this is an organised national movement. But it seems protesters in each city have been emboldened by the actions of demonstrators in others.

Reading China’s social media it’s clear, for example, that demonstrators in Beijing and Shanghai report on each others’ protests, as well as commenting on the initial protest causes in Urumqi.

To date, police reactions have varied between locations. Some police were said to have been allowing demonstrations to continue.

But in other places, minor scuffles have been reported, including some arrests.

Off the streets and away from the demonstrators, asymptomatic residents of apartment blocks in lockdown have occasionally continued to protest.

Student demands

Some 40 students at China’s leading Peking University issued a declaration on Sunday that criticised “the implementation of the dynamic zero policy”. They said the COVID-zero policies had an increasing number of problems and have led to “horrible tragedies”, though they also acknowledged the importance and effectiveness of the safety measures implemented earlier in the pandemic.

They also said “The most urgent task now is to find a temporary way of coexistence that minimises the danger of the epidemic while ensuring basic social order and basic economic and livelihood needs”.

To this end, they propose five key measures:

“To avoid the abuse of public power, all regional quarantine blockades should be stopped to ensure that all people in communities, villages, units and schools can enter and leave freely”
“Abolish technical means to monitor the whereabouts of citizens, such as pass codes and [health code] cell phone tracking app. Stop considering the spread of the epidemic as the responsibility of certain individuals or institutions. Devote resources to long-term work such as vaccine, drug development and hospital construction”
“Implement voluntary [PCR] testing and voluntary quarantine for undiagnosed and asymptomatic individuals”
“Liberalize restrictions on the expression of public opinion and allow suggestions and criticism of specific implementation problems in different regions”
“Make truthful disclosures of infection data, including the number of infected people, the death rate, long [COVID] rate, to eliminate epidemic panic during the transition”.

The key issues are how to move from the current “dynamic zero COVID” policy towards something else, and indeed what that should be, given the inadequate health coverage in much of the country.

David S G Goodman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Protests against strict COVID-zero policy are sweeping China. It’s anyone’s guess what happens now – https://theconversation.com/protests-against-strict-covid-zero-policy-are-sweeping-china-its-anyones-guess-what-happens-now-195442

Nationals declare they will oppose the ‘Voice’ referendum

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

The government’s bid to pass a referendum to enshrine an Indigenous Voice in the constitution has been dealt a blow, with the Nationals announcing they will oppose it.

Nationals leader David Littleproud said the party didn’t believe the Voice would “genuinely close the gap”.

It believed in “empowering local indigenous communities, giving them the power at a local level, not creating another layer of bureaucracy here in Canberra,” he told a news conference on Monday after the Nationals party room endorsed the position.

he said he had had consultations with Uluru Statement from the Heart co-chairs Megan Davis and Pat Anderson “to make sure we understood what this was trying to achieve”.

The Nationals, emphasising they are a separate party, have pre-empted the Liberals announcing a position. Opposition leader Peter Dutton has delayed declaring a stance until more detail of the referendum proposal is released. The government is committed to a vote this term but has not set a date.

Indigenous Nationals senator Jacinta Price, who has been outspoken against the Voice since she entered parliament at the election, told the news conference, “What we need now is practical measures, not an idea that lacks complete and utter detail that’s based on emotional blackmail”.

It was “not racist to disagree with a proposal that’s been put forward to the Australian people that lacks detail, that divides us along the lines of race,” she said.

“I do not buy into that narrative. I would suggest that that sort of narrative is coercive control. It’s a way to push people into feeling guilt for our nation’s history when we should be celebrating who we are as Australians.

“Only then can we actually achieve anything real for our marginalised,” Price said.

“It doesn’t automatically make you marginalised to be an Indigenous Australian, but we do have a hell of a lot of marginalised Australians. And those people are largely out of sight, out of mind.

“Those people do not speak English as a first language. And those people still live very much along the lines of traditional culture. They are who we should be focused on.

“Unfortunately, this Voice model is about empowering the elites. It’s about a transfer of power and nothing more than that.”

Littleproud and Price were flanked by party colleagues.

Price took a personal swipe at the Minister for Indigenous Australians Linda Burney.

“Minister Burney might be able to take a private jet out into a remote community, dripping with Gucci and tell people in the dirt what’s good for them. But they are in the dark and they have been in the dark.”

There has been earlier speculation the opposition might allow its members to decide their own positions on the referendum, because of the division within its ranks.

Former prime minister John Howard told The Australian earlier this month he would counsel against the Coalition having a free vote.

Howard said there were “substantial arguments against the Voice”.

He said among the people he saw in the Liberal base “I don’t find any reaction to the Voice other than one of hostility”.

“I don’t get the impression the Voice is something that is going to unite the country the way the 1967 referendum did because that was just so palpably fair, whereas people are suspicious of the Voice”.

Labor’s special envoy for reconciliation and implementation of the Uluru Statement, Pat Dodson, told the ABC the government had not yet put forward the bill to set up the referendum “so it is a bit premature really and a bit inept to think that you would adopt a position well out before you saw anything of what the people, First Nations people were asking for the government”.

A referendum requires support in a majority of states as well as an overall majority to pass. Only eight of 44 questions have been caried, and it is conventional wisdom that bipartisanship is needed for success.

– ref. Nationals declare they will oppose the ‘Voice’ referendum – https://theconversation.com/nationals-declare-they-will-oppose-the-voice-referendum-195446

Victoria faces a grave climate and energy crisis. The new government’s policies must be far bolder

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ariel Liebman, Ariel Liebman Director, Monash Energy Institute and Professor of Sustainable Energy Systems, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University

The Andrews Labor government has been returned in Victoria. It must now reckon with two particularly crucial challenges: runaway climate change and wartime-scale energy costs.

Victorians are still reeling from rare major flooding in which the state’s largest dam, Dartmouth, spilled over. Meanwhile, electricity prices in Victoria are rising dramatically – in turn, driving up prices for consumers.

The Andrews government has signalled a major shakeup of Victoria’s energy sector. Its pre-election commitments – a 95% renewable electricity target by 2035 and net-zero emissions by 2045 – are definite moves in the right direction.

And plans to reinstate the State Electricity Commission, including a constitutional amendment to cement this change permanently, speaks to the government’s intention to regain control of the electricity market and skyrocketing energy prices.

These are significant pledges and daunting tasks to accomplish. But the Victorian government must go further to secure the energy sector and take stronger climate action.

Power station at the end of a road — Vcitoria’s Loy Yang coal-fired power station will shut a decade earlier than expected.
Shutterstock

Reducing energy costs

Today’s high energy costs are driven primarily by fossil fuel supply constraints. The reduction in gas supply due to sanctions on Russia has exposed the delicate balance of supply and demand, and the fragility of the global fossil-based energy system.

For more than a decade, specialists have known the long-term solution to reduce electricity prices and cost volatility: a large-scale shift to renewable sources of energy.

This would shield us from short-term supply and demand shocks because the cost of renewables-produced wholesale energy is fixed at construction, with no variable costs such as fuel.

Shifting to renewables would also make electricity cheaper than coal and gas in countries with major wind and sun advantages, such as Australia and Indonesia. And it would decouple electricity production from strongly geographically concentrated sources of fossil fuels such as in the middle east.

But realistically, in the next two years or so the Victorian and Australian governments can only manage energy prices by curbing the worst excesses of an unfettered free market operation in natural gas and retail electricity.

We are still working with precisely the same market frameworks as when deregulation started in 1998. Victoria, and the other states, need to accept that this framework has failed to produce benefits to consumers, particularly for households.

For example, in the decade to June 2013, electricity prices for Australian households increased by an average 72% in real terms.

We must go back to the drawing board to determine what the energy market should look like. In the meantime, Australian states and territories must consider reimposing price caps on energy retailers.

An immediate relief measure would be to delink Australia’s natural gas market from global markets for a limited period.

The only sure way to do this is by implementing a domestic gas reservation policy, which entails reserving a portion of Australian gas for domestic use, rather than exporting it. This must be nationally coordinated, as we have a strongly interconnected national gas market.

Western Australia uses its own isolated energy system and put a gas reservation policy in place years ago, which seeks to make the equivalent of 15% of gas exports available for people in WA. This policy has helped mitigate price shocks.

Since winning the election, Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews has continued to urge the federal government to impose such a policy Australia wide. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese should heed these calls.

Wind turbines in a field — Victoria has a 95% renewable electricity target by 2035.
Alex Eckermann/Unsplash, CC BY

Steps to reduce emissions

Our energy futures are intrinsically intertwined with addressing climate change.

The world has only eight years left for global warming to be limited to 1.5℃. This means accelerating the switch to renewable energy without any further delays.

Electric cars charging while parked — The Andrews government aims to decarbonise road transport by 2050.
AAP Image/Supplied by Lake Macquarie City Council

Our first step must be to make all electricity renewable by 2035 in Victoria (and, indeed, in the rest of Australia).

Second, we need a transition to electric vehicles across all transport systems as fast as possible and well before 2040. The Andrews government is investing $100 million to decarbonise the state’s road transport sector, but the transition won’t be complete until 2050.

Third, hard-to-abate sectors – such as certain manufacturing operations, shipping and aviation – need ongoing technological development.

They require significant government support to progress clean fuels, likely based on the renewable hydrogen to ammonia pathway. Victoria has a range of hydrogen and ammonia related industry development policies that show the government recognises this sector’s importance.

Ultimately, the incoming Victorian government’s promises address the first issue well, while making some headway on the second and third.

The Victorian government must be brave

We can’t rely on the rest of the world for innovation. Governments in Australia must play a more prominent role in infrastructure investment, technology research and development, energy industry development and significant market reform.

Tackling all these challenges isn’t really a job for a single state, particularly given Australia has one major east coast electricity grid and one national energy framework.

The Victorian government cannot achieve any significant changes without working closely with other states and the federal government. In this, state governments must be brave and go against the past three decades of hands-off government approaches to essential energy infrastructure.

This isn’t a time for leaving things to the market to resolve. The Victorian government must take immediate and giant leaps to ensure a stable and climate-friendly energy sector.

Ariel Liebman receives funding from the Australian Research Council, RACE for 2030 CRC, Engie, Data61/CSIRO.

– ref. Victoria faces a grave climate and energy crisis. The new government’s policies must be far bolder – https://theconversation.com/victoria-faces-a-grave-climate-and-energy-crisis-the-new-governments-policies-must-be-far-bolder-195096

Labour’s share of national income has been remarkably consistent since the 1860s

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jakob Madsen, Professor of Economics, The University of Western Australia

Inflation and sluggish wage growth have raised concerns that wages and salaries are becoming an increasing smaller share of national income.

Australian Council of Trade Unions head Sally McManus has said labour’s share of income is at its lowest point since 1960 – “a shameful situation for us to be in as a country”.

To get a perspective on this, we looked at how the labour share has evolved in Australia since the 1860s.

Our results show labour’s share of national income has indeed declined since the 1970s, but there is no sense of any permanent trend. Over the past 160 years, despite massive growth and social change, labour’s share seems to have been remarkably resilient.

How we calculated labour’s share

In 1860 the Australian economy revolved mainly around the production wool, wheat and gold. In the 1850s, Victoria produced more than a third of the world’s gold. So our data effectively covers the entire history of Australia since the birth of modern manufacturing.

Our graph shows labour income divided by national income, which we refer to as “labour’s share of income”.

Labour income is defined as employee compensation and imputed wages of the self-employed. National income is defined as gross domestic product minus capital depreciation, indirect taxes and imputed income from owner-occupied housing.

The ratio of these two values is the proportion of income being paid to labour, with the remainder being earned by land rents and returns to capital, such as retained profits or dividends.

The proportion can exceed 100% when profits are negative, as they did in the Great Depression in the 1930s.

The graph shows labour’s share peaking in the mid-1970s, and declining since. Before then, the impression is that labour’s share of income has cycled around a constant value – about 80% – with no clear trend or shift.

Remarkable constancy

This constancy is remarkable when considered against the massive social and economic changes that have occurred over the past 160 years.

In that time, Australia has experienced the industrial revolution and the information revolution; major depressions in the 1890s, 1921 and 1930s; two world wars; massive postwar migration; the rise of the female workforce; and globalisation.

Yet none of these technological, economic or institutional changes appears to have any significant permanent effect on the distribution of income between labour and capital.

Labour’s share of Australia’s economic growth over the past 160 years of economic growth has been more or less constant. When there has been productivity growth and GDP growth, wages have grown in tandem.

However, there have been significant changes at medium-term frequencies of ten to 20 years. These cycles generally reflect major recessions.

One explanation for this is that in a recession, when sales fall, employers cannot easily shed labour or reduce wages. Consequently, dividends and other payments to the owners of capital fall faster than the wage bill.

Paradoxically, therefore, a high labour share could be bad news for labour in the sense that it is associated with periods of high unemployment.

This provides a caution that increasing the share is not itself an objective, and there may be good reasons not to be too concerned about a decline in the share going to labour, depending on the cause.

What’s driving the recent trend

Labour’s declining share since the 1970s is part of a global trend. Some attribute this to an inevitable consequence of economic growth, capital accumulation, technical change and automation.

In Australia’s case is has been attributed to two main changes: cycles in the mining sector, and the changes in financial services.

Mining is very capital-intensive, so capital’s share of income tends to rise and fall along with energy and resource prices. This is a cyclical effect that will likely reverse itself in time.

Mining is capital-intensive, so a lower share of income goes to labour.
Shutterstock

Labour’s falling share of income in financial services potentially represents a more permanent change, with, for example, the labour-intensive system of suburban branch banks rendered redundant by digital technology.

In theory, automation and ongoing labour-saving technological change could continue to reduce labour’s income share in this way. There is some evidence this has been occurring globally across many sectors in recent years.

However, when viewed against the backdrop of 160 years of growth, we see no evidence that the massive labour-saving technologies of the past had any permanent effect of labour share.

The past does not necessarily predict the future. But it does suggest that labour’s share of income is remarkably robust to many types of institutional and economic change in the longer term.

Shocks have caused changes in the distribution of incomes in the short to medium term, but these have been self-correcting.

Peter Robertson receives funding from The Australia Research Council

Jakob Madsen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Labour’s share of national income has been remarkably consistent since the 1860s – https://theconversation.com/labours-share-of-national-income-has-been-remarkably-consistent-since-the-1860s-195436

The Past is Present: reflecting on 150 years of Chinese art at the National Gallery of Victoria

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alison Carroll, Senior Research Fellow, Victorian College of the Arts, The University of Melbourne

Scotty So, Wearing a mask at the end of the Spanish flu, no. 1 2020 inkjet print 76.3 × 50.8 cm (image) 86.5 × 61.0 cm (sheet). National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne Purchased, Victorian Foundation for Living Australian Artists, 2021 © Scotty So

Earlier this month, Penny Wong detailed the last 50 years of Labor government engagement with China in her Whitlam Oration, tracing how the relationship’s varying warmth and chill have been politicised.

China – The Past is Present, the new exhibition at the National Gallery of Victoria (NGV), is a wonderful context for this speech.

The exhibition is about the depth and complexity of Chinese culture – visual and wider – as collected by one major art institution here in Euro-centric Melbourne. It is a long history, in collecting terms, undertaken by curators who have spent years working in the area.

In recent decades Mae Anna Pang notably collected historic Chinese paintings and calligraphy. Now curator Wayne Crothers has very creatively and beautifully (it is an overtly beautiful show) brought these traditions into the present.

Crothers’ years living in East Asia have given the ideas and interpretations he brings both a seriousness of intent and lightness of touch not often apparent.

But other individuals are part of this as well. The people who have found, taken, paid for or been given Chinese works of art over the last 150 years and then passed them on.

Long Australian connections

In her oration, Wong said “when Australians look out to the world, we see ourselves reflected in it”.

The first Chinese object was acquired by the year-old gallery in 1862, the same year the well known and most glamorous of Australians in China was born: G.E. Morrison, son of the first principal of Geelong College. As the Times of London’s correspondent in Peking (now Beijing) from 1897 to 1912, he became internationally known as “Chinese Morrison”.

Morrison’s bequest of mostly court accoutrements, including courtly textiles and ceramics, came to the NGV in 1921.

Chinese Formal court robe (Chaofu or Chaopao) (mid 19th century) silk, fur, silk and metalic thread, gilt (kesi) 142.0 cm (centre back) 62.5 cm (sleeve length).
National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne Bequest of Dr G.E. Morrison, 1921 Photo: National Galle

Serious collectors like H.W. Kent followed. Kent was a businessman in China and Japan, and in 1938 he became the gallery’s first curator of the Asian collection. He built the extensive holdings especially of Song and Tang dynasty works we see in the permanent hang today.

James Mollison, following Gough Whitlam’s ventures, was sent to China in 1976 as a young gallery director of the yet-to-be-built National Gallery of Australia.

Chinese, Scholar’s rock, 17th century limestone, wood (Hongmu) 63.5 x 41.9 x 25.4 cm (overall).
National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne Purchased, NGV Supporters of Asian Art, 2012

He recalled to me negotiating the intended acquisition of over 1,000 Mao-era posters. In 1985, Mollison also acquired an extensive woodcut collection originally brought together by legendary journalist and editor, and founder of Australian Art Monthly, Peter Townsend.

Mollison further described a visiting Chinese diplomat to National Gallery of Australia saying:

eventually we will have to borrow from you, nothing like either of these collections exists in China.

Chinese, Chair 18th century lacquer on wood 110.5×67.0x51.5 cm.
National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne Felton Bequest, 1964

Today collectors and givers to our institutions range from the high profile Judith Neilson of White Rabbit Gallery with its huge collection of contemporary Chinese work, to Rachel Faggetter, whose donation of Maoist era works to the NGV are well included in this show, and Jason Yeap who has been generous for years in this area.

An exhibition of delight

In The Past is Present, Crothers has created tableaux – like little stage sets – each around an idea important in Chinese culture.

There are a group of works of restrained monochrome spatial sophistication next to an assemblage of bright, smiling, Maoist era odes to workers’ paradises.

Installation view of China – The past is present, on display at NGV International , Melbourne from 15 October 2022 – 20 February 2023.
Photo: Tom Ross

Next to this are deep red richly incised containers and portrait busts, next to the tutti-frutti colours of karaoke pop.

The entry tableau says it all: the strange twisted rocks, carved by eons of nature’s winds and water, so valued in traditional China, next to a polyurethane chair carved, it seems, by a blowtorch.

The whole clever display has a moment of dark red tranquillity at its centre, with a wall of 18th century muted painted landscapes facing a 2010 video by Yang Yongliang of Hong Kong-like traffic dwarfed by similar mountains.

Everywhere the contemporary is given depth by the historical, and the historical gives context to the work made now, but it isn’t didactic. You come away thinking it is an exhibition of delight.

Looking to the future

The works on display here, and in collections around Australia, gathered over decades, have become part of our national fortune. Important in themselves, they also represent our history of engagement.

Part of the overt long-term reality around us and seen in the exhibition is the work of artists of Chinese background, who live in Australia. There are the well known fanciful sculptures of Guan Wei and exquisite porcelain busts of Ah Xian, sitting alongside work by emerging artists like the witty photography of Scotty So and ethereal paintings of Louise Zhang.

How are we faring in our cultural relations with China? Are we asking the current day “Chinese Morrisons” and Peter Townsends for their help to maintain ongoing cultural relationships? To be curious about Chinese culture and keen to engage in a long-term, creative, meaningful way? Are we celebrating Guan Wei and his compatriots?

I would hope so, and maybe Penny Wong’s advocacy is key here, but let us see.

Both in this exhibition and beyond, Chinese art in Australia is about people and connections. Long held, strong working and personal relationships evident even in a formal setting like this. It belies the superficial hostility we witness across the twittering classes.

China – The past is present is at the National Gallery of Victoria until February 20 2023.

Alison Carroll does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The Past is Present: reflecting on 150 years of Chinese art at the National Gallery of Victoria – https://theconversation.com/the-past-is-present-reflecting-on-150-years-of-chinese-art-at-the-national-gallery-of-victoria-194734

Scott Morrison to face parliamentary censure for undermining political trust

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Scott Morrison will face a parliamentary censure motion this week, after the inquiry by former High Court judge Virginia Bell found his multi-ministry power grab “corrosive of trust in government”.

Cabinet on Monday confirmed legislation to implement the Bell recommendations would be introduced this week and the censure would also be moved.

Anthony Albanese is not planning to move it himself – he indicated that would be done by the Leader of the House Tony Burke or Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus.

Morrison had himself appointed to five portfolios in 2020-21, with only one of the ministers being aware at the time he was their co-minister. No public announcement was ever made – his actions only came to light after the election.

Bell concluded that “the lack of disclosure of the appointments to the public was apt to undermine public confidence in government. Once the appointments became known, the secrecy with which they had been surrounded was corrosive of trust in government”.

The opposition will vote against the censure. Manager of Opposition Business Paul Fletcher said the motion was “a political stunt” by the government.

Fetcher said the solicitor-general had found no illegality in what Morrison did, nor had Bell.

He told Sky: “Censure motions are typically used to deal with the accountability of a minister to the Parliament. There is no need for a censure motion here. It would purely be an exercise in political payback.”

“The issue of the relationship between the then prime minister and his then ministers – that’s a matter for the prime minister and each of those ministers. I’ve certainly said if I’d been a minister who’d been on the receiving end of this, I would not have been happy. But that’s a very separate question from your calling for consequences.”

Albanese rejected Fletcher’s argument.

“It’s not a personal relationship between two mates over what happened down the pub. This is about accountability of our democratic system, and whether the parliament was functioning properly. And about the relationship between the prime minister and the people of Australia.”

Fletcher flagged the opposition would support the legislation to implement the Bell recommendations to ensure ministerial appointments are always made public. Albanese indicated the legislation mightn’t be passed before parliament rises this week but said regulatory changes had already been made.

– ref. Scott Morrison to face parliamentary censure for undermining political trust – https://theconversation.com/scott-morrison-to-face-parliamentary-censure-for-undermining-political-trust-195443

Visually striking science experiments at school can be fun, inspiring and safe – banning is not the answer

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nathan Kilah, Senior Lecturer in Chemistry, University of Tasmania

To a young mind, science can be magical. Perhaps you remember a visually striking or seemingly inexplicable scientific demonstration from your own youth?

A liquid spontaneously and unexpectedly changes colour. A banknote is set alight without being burnt. A column of colourful bubbles shoots into the air.

Scientists and science teachers often make use of dramatic demonstrations to capture the attention of young, impressionable minds, to inspire and to teach. But sometimes these experiments go wrong.

In September, a public display in Girona, Spain involving liquid nitrogen in large metal barrels failed, causing injuries to the presenters and the audience.

In October, a teacher and a student in the US state of Virginia were airlifted to hospital after a methanol fire demonstration caused an explosion.

And last week, a demonstration known as the “carbon snake” injured several schoolchildren in Sydney, leading to the suggestion that such experiments should be banned.

A bowl with sand and a dark curled burnt object on top — Burning sugar and baking soda produces the ‘carbon snake’, a classic demonstration of several chemical reactions.
Vins Contributor/Shutterstock

Demonstrations are a valuable teaching tool

Our rapidly changing, technologically complex world benefits greatly from a scientifically informed and engaged population.

A key aspect of achieving a “science-savvy” community is inspiring our children to value and connect with science. Demonstrations can be inspirational and memorable.

They are valuable tools to link young people with science, but a careful line must be walked to balance spectacle with the expectation that school is a safe place.

Demonstrations have been used in science education for centuries, and shown to enhance education when students are actively engaged in the experiment.

Scientific demonstrations are the living embodiment of science as an observational practice: seeing is believing.

Participating in an experiment provides direct, lived experience of scientific principles in action, while also affording an element of mystery and intrigue. This intrigue can open a curiosity-driven, questioning mindset that is central to building hypotheses, understanding, and applying the scientific method.

Not just ‘scientific theatre’

For effective learning it is crucial that a demonstration is more than scientific theatre.

Recreating an ancient alchemical pyrotechnic based on honey gives a brilliantly violent burst of flames. On its own, this is just noise, flash and smoke. It becomes much more when discussed in the context of the origins of medicine, the development of gunpowder, the ratio of chemicals needed for optimal reaction, and the contribution of alchemy to modern science.

Video showing a plate above a bunsen burner spontaneously burst into flame — Honey, potassium nitrate, and sulphur provide a demonstration of a brilliant alchemical pyrotechnic.
Author provided

However, this is also a potentially dangerous experiment, and should only be attempted by a suitably cautious chemist, with appropriate preparation and assessment of risk.

Assessing risk is an act of imagination. The worst possible outcomes must first be considered before controls are applied to make the activity as safe as possible.

Risk assessments are typically managed through the application of the hierarchy of controls to reduce or eliminate the dangers of an activity.

A rainbow-coloured inverted pyramid listing a series of practices for safety — The hierarchy of controls as defined by the US National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
NIOSH/Wikimedia Commons

You might be surprised to see that personal protective equipment (think lab coats, gloves and safety glasses) only come into play at the final step in this process. These are among the first things that come to mind when we think “safety”. But they are most effective only after other elements of control have been implemented before them.

Introducing some controls can be challenging, like finding a suitable substitute for a hazardous material that is uniquely suited to a particular chemical reaction.

But engineering controls, such as increasing the distance between viewer and demonstration, are simple and usually highly effective.

Once we establish the risks and have considered their likelihood and potential consequences, we can decide whether the activity is worth pursuing.

Training, not banning

Universities and professional scientific bodies have a role to play in providing training, professional development and mentoring to teachers.

This is especially important for teachers who may be teaching outside their direct area of training and who may not have the hands-on experience of experimental risk assessment or chemical handling.

In addition to workplace-specific risk-assessment processes, the American Chemical Society has many resources available for school teachers, including highly useful safety guidelines for chemical demonstrations.

These guidelines show the depth of thought and preparation required before conducting a demonstration in front of others.

Time will tell what factors were responsible for the incidents mentioned above. In the meantime, teachers should be empowered to share the wonder and visual impact of science through demonstrations to their classes.

And while failed experiments are an important part of learning how to do science, they can and must be safe.

Nathan Kilah has received funding from Inspiring Australia to run ‘Chemistry of Fireworks’ lectures and pyrotechnic displays, funding from the Festival of Bright Ideas for fire and chemical reaction based scientific demonstrations, and funding and administrative support from the Royal Australian Chemical Institute.

Peter Rutledge has received funding for travel and administrative support from the Royal Australian Chemical Institute NSW to present the Nyholm Youth Lectures at high schools across NSW. His lectures included live chemistry demonstrations with student participation.

– ref. Visually striking science experiments at school can be fun, inspiring and safe – banning is not the answer – https://theconversation.com/visually-striking-science-experiments-at-school-can-be-fun-inspiring-and-safe-banning-is-not-the-answer-195362

More businesses are offering online medical certificates and telehealth prescriptions. What are the pros and cons?

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Centaine Snoswell, Research Fellow Health Economics, The University of Queensland

Telehealth has played an important role during the pandemic. Telephone and online consultations have enabled social distancing and kept patients and clinicians safe from transmissible infections.

Since the start of COVID in March 2020, there have been 122 million telehealth consultations funded through Medicare. About 90% of these services were provided by general practitioners (GPs), with nine out of ten of these consults done as a telephone call.

Online services for prescriptions and medical certificates have become available to consumers at the click of a button. Given the shortage of GPs, difficulties getting timely appointments, and clinic restrictions if patients have COVID-like symptoms, consumers seem to be welcoming these services. Patients can consult a GP by telephone or video call, and then receive an electronically dispatched medical certificate or prescription (if clinically appropriate).

These services are either paid for partially, or totally by the consumer, with limited Medicare rebates available. They are fast, convenient and readily available. But what do consumers need to know about their pros and cons?

On the plus side…

Convenience

Offering services online means ease of access and convenience. We have seen this in the banking, retail and travel industries. Who wants to wait three days for a GP appointment, spend two hours in traffic and one hour in the waiting room, for a short consultation?

Access to care

When providing health services, we have to think of our whole population (see points below on equity). These instant services offer greater convenience and benefits for those who find it hard to access transport, are time-poor, or who find it difficult to leave the house (such as parents of little kids or people with other physical disabilities or mental health concerns).

Reduced wait times

If it isn’t possible to get an appointment with your regular GP and you need a medical certificate for work, these services may be a good fit. They also enable acute conditions to be managed in a timely manner, for instance by getting a script for tablets to stop vomiting.

Reducing congestion in hospitals and medical centres

These services also reduce pressure on primary care services and hospitals. If someone can be supported by an online service instead of visiting an emergency department or urgent care centre, then the bricks-and-mortar hospitals, clinics and medical centres remain available for people with more serious health needs.

woman comfort child while on phone — You might get a quicker telehealth appointment, but complex conditions might require an in-person consult.
Pexels, CC BY

But there are also downsides

Continuity of care

The downside is you may risk losing continuity of care, as you are not necessarily going to be seeing your own GP online. If you have complex health needs or chronic conditions, it is better you have a primary care provider who knows your history and can manage your health condition holistically.

Access to a complete health history

Australia doesn’t yet have a single complete and integrated information system for sharing all personal health information. So when you access these services, it is often your responsibility to share health information with the provider and also inform your GP about your online appointment.

However, communication systems are improving slowly, and a summary may be shared electronically with your nominated GP after your consultation. For patients who have opted in to My Health Record, some of this communication will happen automatically.

Complex conditions

There are limits to the types of services that can be provided online or by phone. You may need an in-person appointment, especially if a physical assessment is required, or the concerns are more complex than anticipated. GPs adhere to guidelines and practice standards irrespective of how services are delivered. For instance, provision of e-scripts and medical certificates require documentation and screening measures to ensure appropriate care is provided.

Medications

Online or telehealth services aren’t suited for starting new medications that require monitoring or might have side effects.

New medications for chronic conditions should ideally be started by someone who you can see you again to check they are working and manage potential side effects or reactions. Additionally, there are medications (such as strong pain relief) these services won’t prescribe, and consumers need to see an GP in person to obtain.

Medical certificates aren’t just for your boss

Local pharmacists can write medical certificates for single days and assist with advice and medications for minor health issues. However, they cannot write prescriptions.

The aim of a medical certificate is to satisfy an employer. But getting a medical certificate may also be an opportunity to have symptoms checked and make sure there is nothing seriously wrong.

Online services make accessing a medical certificate for the flu or gastro much more convenient. However, if people are having ongoing health issues that require regular time away from work, they should be seeing a regular GP to help manage their condition.

Online doesn’t mean equal access

There is the risk of inequity of access for these services, especially for consumers who don’t know how to access them, can’t afford to pay, or do not have access to the necessary technology (including reliable internet).

A recent paper suggested ways to tackle this digital divide. These included improving digital health literacy, workforce training, co-designing new models of care with clinicians and patients, change management, advocacy for culturally appropriate services, and sustainable funding.

person holding blister pack of yellow capsules — Strong painkillers won’t be prescribed online.
Pexels/Polina Tankilevitch, CC BY

Other points to remember

Finally, consumers need assurance that health services are provided by suitably qualified health professionals. This is usually achieved with confirmation of health provider credentials prior to, or at the start of, the consultation.

Consumers can also look up their provider through the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (Ahpra) where all clinicians are registered.

Consumers should also look for an Australian service to ensure it adheres to Australia’s quality standards and clinician registration criteria. This is also important because of the Australian standards around personal data collection and storage. Consumers should read information provided by services about their data policies.

As with all health care, it is about finding the right balance and ensuring services align with clinical indications.

Telehealth is not about replacing in-person appointments. Telehealth should be used in conjunction with face-to-face advice, to maintain high-quality care that best suits the needs and wishes of the consumer.

– ref. More businesses are offering online medical certificates and telehealth prescriptions. What are the pros and cons? – https://theconversation.com/more-businesses-are-offering-online-medical-certificates-and-telehealth-prescriptions-what-are-the-pros-and-cons-194154

Don’t just bet on the metrics – personal connection is the real key to managing remote workers well

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rebecca Downes, Lecturer in Management, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Remote working has become much more common since the pandemic sent people home from their offices and into the Zoom universe. This has put the onus on managers to find new and better ways to engage with and motivate staff, and we’re still learning how best to do this.

Perhaps the commonest advice given to managers is to provide remote staff with clear, measurable goals. Set targets, monitor progress, measure results.

And at first glance, this makes perfect sense. After all, when staff aren’t in the office you can’t keep an eye on them. Better to define outcomes and let them get on with it. You can then measure achievement without micromanaging the process.

But our research suggests this advice, however well-intentioned, might not be entirely correct. Indeed, if you follow it to the letter, it seems unlikely you’ll get the results you’re expecting.

Some work is harder to measure

We began researching remote work before the pandemic by asking experienced managers what they did differently with remote staff and what factors they felt were most important.

Earlier studies suggested managers would set clear goals and then monitor progress, otherwise leaving staff to get on with it. Instead, the managers in our study told us they tended to treat remote workers holistically – as people, not just staff. They focused on social connections instead of just objective performance.

We believe these managers have learned to discount conventional advice and develop practices that are more effective with remote staff. As such, their experience contains valuable lessons for today’s managers.

One described spending one-on-one calls “just connection and socialising … [It] builds the rapport and the connection [because] you lose opportunities for that being remote.”

One of the main reasons why these managers didn’t rely on metrics and measurable goals with their remote staff is that a great deal of remote work is “knowledge work”. It’s often difficult to quantify this kind of work – to know in advance what will be required or how long it will take.

And because people often work in teams, it can be hard to untangle individual contributions. At best, managers may have rough estimates of individual productivity. But if someone doesn’t meet those estimates, they need more context to understand why – and that relies on talking to people.

Hoping to only measure progress in unpredictable knowledge work the way we measure progress with more predictable work is unlikely to succeed.

An office allows managers to read people’s moods more easily, and this can be key to evaluating performance.
Getty Images

Nurturing relationships

The other reason these managers needed more than goals and metrics was the lack of interpersonal contact. They could not unobtrusively observe how remote staff were coping. As one manager put it, “You don’t have that visual of, oh, this person walked in today and looks happy or they look sad.”

Another manager pointed out that with in-person interaction, “You can see people being playful, hear the grunts or the moans or the sighs or whatever when they’re under pressure. And likewise, you can see when they’re visibly, you know, feeling successful.” With remote staff, “you just never get a sense of that”.

This day-to-day observation was important enough that the managers we spoke to devoted considerable time and energy compensating. They increased communication with remote staff and nurtured relationships.

Advising managers to “focus on clear objectives” with remote workers overlooks the importance of relationships as the basis for understanding performance.

Furthermore, when people are stressed, disengaged or unsure they’re doing a good job, their first instinct is not always to share that with their manager. Instead, they might try to mask those feelings and keep up a good appearance – what one manager called “sticking on a plastic smile for ten minutes”.

Intervention to avoid escalation

In a shared workspace it’s easier to pick up body language, changes in behaviour or working relationships that might hint at deeper problems. That’s much harder when we communicate primarily by email, text or short video calls.

And these cues can be very important. If someone misses a delivery deadline or is less productive, for example, their manager is only likely to find out after it happens. Whereas noticing a change in behaviour earlier might give the manager the chance to intervene and address the problem before it escalates.

Overall, we recommend embracing interpersonal connections rather than relying on measurable goals for what might be unmeasurable work. The fewer the opportunities for in-person observation, the more important establishing good one-on-one relationships becomes.

It will take more time, and maybe more emotional energy, but there’s no shortcut to managing well.

Urs Daellenbach undertakes research with funding from the Science for Technological Innovation National Science Challenge hosted at Callaghan Innovation.

Noelle Donnelly and Rebecca Downes do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Don’t just bet on the metrics – personal connection is the real key to managing remote workers well – https://theconversation.com/dont-just-bet-on-the-metrics-personal-connection-is-the-real-key-to-managing-remote-workers-well-193206

Cities, just not as we know them – get ready for NSW’s Six Cities Region

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Geoff Roberts, Adjunct Professor, City Futures Research Centre, UNSW Sydney

Australia’s first multi-city region, the Six Cities Region, is being developed in New South Wales. A multi-city region, also known as a mega-region, establishes an integrated network of globally and locally connected cities.

The Six Cities Region spans the Lower Hunter and Greater Newcastle City, Central Coast City, Illawarra-Shoalhaven City, Western Parkland City, Central River City and Eastern Harbour City.

Map showing the Six Cities Region of NSW — Map of the Six Cities Region.
Source: Six Cities Region Discussion Paper/Greater Cities Commission

The region is home to around 6 million people. It’s expected to reach 8 million in the next two decades.

The Six Cities concept has evolved from the 2018 Greater Sydney plan, A Metropolis of Three Cities. Introduced by the then Greater Sydney Commission, the plan established the Western Parkland City, Central River City and the Eastern Harbour City. The priority then was to ensure housing, jobs, infrastructure and services were all within a 30-minute trip for more people.

Now, as the Greater Cities Commission, we are developing a response to the reality that cities can either compound or address some of society’s biggest challenges: inequality, congestion, pollution and social exclusion.

Released today, a research report by the Greater Cities Commission and The Business of Cities, entitled Greater Cities: The Global Experience of Planning, Preparing and Promoting the Multi-City Region, notes:

“We are in the middle of the century of cities – the hundred years of accelerated urbanisation from 1980 to 2080 that is creating a majority-urban planet.”

And the proportion of the world’s people who live in cities continues to increase. The United Nations predicts cities will house 6.9 billion people by 2050. Australia leads the way in urbanisation – close to 90% of us live in cities.

As pressures on urban centres rise, we must reimagine how we live, work and connect in our cities.

What are the challenges and opportunities?

How do multi-city regions help us with ongoing housing challenges, cost-of-living increases and development constraints in central cities? Essentially, they do so by opening up opportunities across more connected centres. This distributes wealth across a larger region and provides more equitable access to healthcare, education and training facilities.

Through co-ordinated planning across all levels of government, multi-city regions also offer an opportunity to tackle key environmental challenges. These include climate change, urban heat and the effective roll-out of decarbonisation initiatives.

In the case of NSW, the network of six cities also responds to the pressures of rapid urban growth. It does so by redistributing this growth across a larger area and fuelling development in smaller or lower-demand areas.

What does the Six Cities Region mean in practice?

In establishing the Six Cities Region, we join a global vanguard of up to 20 multi-city regions, which organise and co-ordinate their activities in different ways. What the Six Cities Region does share with other regions, however, is a need to manage high population growth along with huge demand for housing and lifestyle choices.

Table showing snapshot of key features of international multi-city regions

City regions also have to stay ahead of the curve in response to the disruptions of COVID and climate change. At the same time, they must balance and enhance opportunities for business, investment, culture, education and decision-making.

While we focus on the big-picture model in this article, it’s worth noting the Commission’s responsibilities are complex. It is setting and monitoring housing targets for each of the 43 local government areas within the six cities. The Commission must also identify how to achieve more diverse and affordable housing.

Existing housing types across the Six Cities Region

Horizontal bar chart showing housing mix of the six cities — Source: Six Cities Region Discussion Paper/Greater Cities Commission

Work is under way to finalise 5, 10 and 20-year housing targets. These will be released in the region plan towards the end of 2023.

Balancing the global with the local

The Six Cities Region is home to three international airports, three deep seaports, a high concentration of world-class universities and globally significant innovation districts. It will help connect these gateways, institutions and innovation districts to accelerate economic growth, international trade and knowledge jobs.

The challenge and the opportunity lie in delivering globalised localism. This means opening up these six cities to more international growth and opportunities, while fiercely protecting their natural assets.

The region also has the exceptional asset of 65,000 years of continuous culture. We have the opportunity to embed the wisdom and aspirations of First Nations peoples in caring for Country and people, and knowledge sharing.

If successful, the equity and resilience of the region will be second to none. Everyone will have the opportunity to work in great jobs close to home. They will be able to live in vibrant, well-serviced neighbourhoods with diverse and affordable housing options.

Harnessing our enviable assets in a connected way will result in opportunities and benefits for everyone in the Six Cities Region. As the report explains:

“The Six Cities Region has many significant advantages over other mega-regions. These could, with the right shaping interventions, help the region become one of the most advanced and forward-thinking multi-city regions in the world over the next decade.”

Read the Greater Cities: Preparing and Promoting the Multi-City Region report here. You can learn more about multi-city regions around the world via the Greater Cities podcast.

Geoff Roberts is Chief Commissioner of the Greater Cities Commission.

– ref. Cities, just not as we know them – get ready for NSW’s Six Cities Region – https://theconversation.com/cities-just-not-as-we-know-them-get-ready-for-nsws-six-cities-region-194058

COVID nasal sprays may one day prevent and treat infection. Here’s where the science is up to

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lara Herrero, Research Leader in Virology and Infectious Disease, Griffith University

We have vaccines to boost our immune response to SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID. We have medicines you can take at home (and in hospital) to treat COVID. Now researchers are trialling something new.

They want to develop drugs that stop the virus getting into the body in the first place. That includes nasal sprays that stop the virus attaching to cells in the nose.

Other researchers are looking at the potential for nasal sprays to stop the virus replicating in the nose, or to make the nose a hostile place to enter the body.

Here’s where the science is up to and what we can expect next.

How could we block the virus?

“Viral blockade”, as the name suggests, is a simple premise based on blocking SARS-CoV-2. In other words, if something gets in its way, the virus cannot attach to a cell and it can’t infect you.

As SARS-CoV-2 is a respiratory virus, it makes sense to deliver this type of medicine where the virus mainly enters the body – via the nose, in a nasal spray.

There are various groups around the world working on this concept. Some research is still being conducted in the lab. Some agents have progressed to preliminary human trials. None are yet available for widespread use.

Heparin

Heparin is a common medicine that’s been used for decades to thin the blood. Studies in mice show that when heparin is delivered via the nose, it’s safe and effective in preventing the virus binding to nose cells. Researchers believe heparin binds to the virus itself and stops the virus attaching to the cells it’s trying to infect.

A clinical trial is being conducted in Victoria in collaboration between multiple Melbourne-based research centres and the University of Oxford.

Covixyl-V

Covixyl-V (ethyl lauroyl arginine hydrochloride) is another nasal spray under development. It aims to prevent COVID by blocking or modifying the cell surface to prevent the virus from infecting.

This compound has been explored for use in various viral infections, and early studies in cells and small animals has shown it can prevent attachment of SARS-CoV-2 and reduce the overall viral load.

Iota-carrageenan

This molecule, which is extracted from seaweed, acts by blocking virus entry into airway cells.

One study of about 400 health-care workers suggests a nasal spray may reduce the incidence of COVID by up to 80%.

IGM-6268

This is an engineered antibody that binds to SARS-CoV-2, blocking the virus from attaching to cells in the nose.

A nasal and oral (mouth) spray are in a clinical trial to assess safety.

Cold atmospheric plasma

This is a gas that contains charged particles. At cold temperatures, it can alter the surface of a cell.

A lab-based study shows the gas changes expression of receptors on the skin that would normally allow the virus to attach. This results in less SARS-CoV-2 attachment and infection.

Scientists now think this technology could be adapted to a nasal spray to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection.

How could we stop the virus replicating?

Another tactic is to develop nasal sprays that stop the virus replicating in the nose.

Researchers are designing genetic fragments that bind to the viral RNA. These fragments – known as “locked nucleic acid antisense oligonucleotides” (or LNA ASOs for short) – put a proverbial spanner in the works and stop the virus from replicating.

A spray of these genetic fragments delivered into the nose reduced virus replication in the nose and prevented disease in small animals.

How could we change the nose?

A third strategy is to change the nose environment to make it less hospitable for the virus.

That could be by using a nasal spray to change moisture levels (with saline), alter the pH (making the nose more acidic or alkaline), or adding a virus-killing agent (iodine).

Saline can reduce the amount of SARS-CoV-2 in the nose by simply washing away the virus. One study has even found that saline nasal irrigation can lessen COVID disease severity. But we would need further research into saline sprays.

An Australian-led study has found that an iodine-based nasal spray reduced the viral load in the nose. Further clinical trials are planned.

One study used a test spray – containing ingredients including eucalyptus and clove oils, potassium chloride and glycerol. The aim was to kill the virus and change the acidity of the nose to prevent the virus attaching.

This novel formulation has been tested in the lab and in a clinical trial showing it to be safe and to reduce infection rate from about 34% to 13% when compared to placebo controls.

Barriers ahead

Despite promising data so far on nasal sprays for COVID, one of the major barriers is keeping the sprays in the nose.

To overcome this, most sprays need multiple applications a day, sometimes every few hours.

So based on what we know so far, nasal sprays will not singlehandedly beat COVID. But if they are shown to be safe and effective in clinical trials, and receive regulatory approval, they might be another tool to help prevent it.

Lara Herrero receives funding from NHMRC

– ref. COVID nasal sprays may one day prevent and treat infection. Here’s where the science is up to – https://theconversation.com/covid-nasal-sprays-may-one-day-prevent-and-treat-infection-heres-where-the-science-is-up-to-193840

Research suggests one way to prevent depression and anxiety is a strong sense of connection at high school

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Monika Raniti, Research Fellow, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute

About one in five young Australians will experience a mental health problem like depression or anxiety each year. The COVID pandemic has only intensified mental health concerns in young people.

In Australia, decades of investment in early intervention and treatment services have not decreased rates of depression and anxiety. This has sparked more interest in what we can do to prevent mental health problems.
Schools are ideal settings for prevention because you can reach large numbers of students, help build healthy skills and habits, and capitalise on schools being both learning and social environments.

Our new research suggests, one promising way to prevent depression and anxiety is by ensuring students feel a strong sense of belonging and connection to their high school.

What is ‘school connectedness’?

“School connectedness” is about the quality of engagement students have with their peers, teachers, and learning in the school environment.

It can include things such as, knowing teachers support them, having a friend to talk to about their problems, feeling like they can be themselves at school and like school is an enjoyable place to be, and actively participating in school activities.

Students sitting at desks, listening — Up to one in four young Australians experience a mental health issue each year.
Shutterstock

School connectedness has been linked to better academic achievement and wellbeing. But it is now attracting attention as a possible way to protect against depression and anxiety.

However, existing research reviews have tended to look at cross-sectional studies (data collected at one point in time) rather than longitudinal studies (data collected over time). And they haven’t considered anxiety and depression specifically, making it difficult to determine if there is a preventative effect.

Our research

In a new study, we investigated whether school connectedness prevents the onset of later depression and anxiety in 14 to 24 year-olds. We did this with funding from the UK charity, the Wellcome Trust as part of its push to identify innovative interventions for anxiety and depression.

We systematically reviewed ten years of evidence examining relationships between school connectedness and depression and anxiety. After screening 3,552 potential articles, we found 34 longitudinal and two intervention studies which met our inclusion criteria. The intervention studies measured the change in participants’ depressive symptoms before and after a program, compared to participants who did not receive the program.

We then summarised the findings from the included articles.

To ensure young people’s perspectives informed our review, we also partnered with five youth advisers aged 16 to 21 with lived experience of mental health problems and/or the schooling system in Australia, Indonesia, and the Philippines.

Our findings

Most studies found higher levels of school connectedness predicted lower levels of depression and anxiety later. Most studies examined depression.

For example, United States one study of nearly 10,000 students found higher levels of self-reported school connectedness (questions included, “you feel like you are part of your school”, “the teachers at school treat you fairly”) led to reductions in self-reported depressive symptoms in the past week. This effect occurred both later in secondary school and persisted into early adulthood, even when accounting for previous depressive symptoms.

Another study investigated the effect of a whole-school health promotion program in over 5,000 secondary school students in India.

The program encouraged supportive relationships between members of the school community, promoted school belonging, increased participation in school activities, and promoted social skills among students. The study found this led to a reduction in depressive symptoms 17 months later.

Reflections from youth advisers

Our findings resonated with the experience of our youth advisers. For example, one 18-year-old adviser from Australia reflected,

I’ve had mental health issues my whole life […] I noticed the second that I moved schools to a more healthy environment, the rapid improvement of my mental health.

Another 18-year-old adviser from Indonesia explained,

Knowing your school is there for you really calms you down, takes one more thought out of your head, and more weight off your shoulders.

Most of the studies were from high-income countries, primarily the US, yet our advisers stressed the importance of cultural context. One 16-year-old youth adviser explained the importance of religion.

In Indonesia you can’t really dismiss religion. You can’t ignore it because it’s so deeply rooted in our society and that in turn reflects (on) other things like our mental health and even school connectedness.

Interestingly, we found one study reported higher levels of school connectedness led to higher levels of internal distress. Our youth advisers noted that sometimes feeling more connected to school can come with increased expectations from teachers and pressure to perform, which might increase anxiety in some students.

What does this mean for schools?

Our findings show how schools matter for mental health and that fostering school connectedness might be a way to prevent depression and anxiety.

Existing research shows there are a lot of “little things” teachers can do throughout the day in their ordinary interactions with students to foster school connectedness.

This includes, actively listening to students, being available and accessible, advocating for students, encouraging students in their school work even if they are struggling, having empathy for students’ difficulties, and treating students like “humans”.

Students are also more likely to ask for help with their learning when teachers say hello, talk to them and take an interest in what they are doing, and show they are proud of them.

Our youth advisers reinforced the importance of feeling acknowledged by teachers and peers and that students need to be able to safely express their identity.
One 16-year-old youth adviser from Australia explained that feeling connected to school has many parts.

You’ve got that social aspect, but you’ve also got extra-curricular activities, how you’re going through your studies, your classes […] it’s the positive emotions, it’s the relationships, it’s the meaning, it’s engagement, the accomplishment, it’s all of that. Once you feel supported in all these areas is when you feel connected.

Across the pandemic, school closures and remote learning have shaped a different appreciation of the significance of schools for mental health and wellbeing. The question now is how governments, schools and communities act on this information.

If this article has raised issues for you or your child, you can call Lifeline on 13 11 14 or Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800.

Monika Raniti works for the Centre of Research Excellence in Driving Global Investment in Adolescent Health (NHMRC Australia GNT 1171981) and The ALIVE National Centre for Mental Health Research Translation (NHMRC Australia Grant GNT 2002047). She has received funding from the Wellcome Trust, WHO, UNESCO, UNICEF and the Commonwealth Government of Australia for projects related to health promoting schools. She is a member of The Australasian School Based Health Alliance.

Susan M Sawyer is co-director of a WHO Collaborating Centre for Adolescent Health and in this role, regularly engages with UN agencies. Most recently, she lead a body of work for WHO and UNESCO that informed the development of the first global standards on Health-promoting Schools. She is currently leading a series of topic briefs for WHO UNICEF and UNESCO on Health-promoting Schools. She is also a current grantholder with the Commonwealth Government of Australia for a training program on whole-school approaches to health. She was previously a member of an External Advisory Committee for a new clinical guideline from the World Health Organization on School-Based Health Services.

Divyangana Rakesh does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Research suggests one way to prevent depression and anxiety is a strong sense of connection at high school – https://theconversation.com/research-suggests-one-way-to-prevent-depression-and-anxiety-is-a-strong-sense-of-connection-at-high-school-193939

As NZ workers and households tighten their belts, why not a windfall tax on corporate mega-profits too?

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lisa Marriott, Professor of Taxation, Te Herenga Waka — Victoria University of Wellington

Record profits reported by banks, fuel retailers, energy companies and other businesses at a time many New Zealanders are struggling to make ends meet have seen people asking whether it’s time to introduce a “windfall tax” – to be triggered whenever an industry has made “too much profit”.

But what is a windfall tax? How much is “too much profit”? And do windfall taxes actually work? History, it turns out, can tell us a little about taxing a windfall.

A windfall is simply a large amount of money that is received unexpectedly. A windfall tax is a targeted tax on unexpected gains that result from market circumstances rather than any action taken by a firm or industry. It’s not a tax on profits resulting from innovation, entrepreneurship or insightful business decisions.

An element of windfall exists in the banks’ overestimation of COVID-related losses that didn’t eventuate, under investment in generating capacity in the electricity industry, and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine causing oil shortages.

Theoretically, a windfall profit is more than what is normally required to reward shareholders for their investment, and more than what a company would need to be encouraged to invest in technology and innovation.

Windfall taxes are on “excess profits”. They’re also not something that can be predicted and therefore incorporated in regulation.

How much is too much profit?

Recent reports of exceptionally high corporate profits have been met with accusations of profiteering at the expense of consumers.

Among the more egregious examples are the profits of oil giants BP and Shell, which reported global profits of £7.1 billion (NZ$13.7 billion) and £8.2 billion (NZ$15.8 billion) respectively in the three months to September.

Higher profits generally result in larger dividends to shareholders. While some may argue that is the shareholders’ reward for their investment risk, the result is still some transfer of wealth from those who have the least (poorer consumers) to those who have more (shareholders).

It could be argued that where there is negative social impact from excess profits – people unable to use their car because the price of fuel is too high, for example – that some intervention is acceptable.

The history of windfall taxes

Windfall taxes have a long history. A version was applied to UK munitions manufacturers who made large profits from the first world war. New Zealand also introduced an “excess profits duty” in 1916 to help fund the cost of the war.

More recently, an excess profits tax was imposed on banks in the UK in 1981, when the banks were benefiting from high interest rates. And in the US in the 1980s, the federal government imposed windfall taxes on oil companies as price controls were phased out.

Again in the UK, in 1997 a windfall tax was imposed on privatised utility companies. One of the factors driving this was a view that the companies were under-regulated during their initial years in the private sector (note the similar claim made recently about New Zealand’s electricity sector). The government argued efficient regulation would support competition that would minimise the opportunity for excess profits.

A more recent example can be seen in the UK with the introduction of a “temporary, targeted energy profits levy” – essentially a windfall tax – in May this year.

Do they work?

One aim of a windfall tax is to discourage firms from overcharging customers. However, where a firm has significant market power, they may be able to pass the tax on to customers.

There is also the potential the tax could result in reduced investment, which is why the UK tax announced this year has the accompanying tax relief for new investment.

One benefit of a windfall tax is increased government revenue. Earlier windfall taxes intended to raise money for war efforts achieved their objectives. But larger companies became skilled at avoiding them over time.

More recent windfall taxes have not been as successful as anticipated. The US tax on oil in the 1980s is often given as an example of unintended consequences: there was reduced domestic oil production and increased reliance on overseas oil. However, at least some of the failure can be attributed to poor tax design.

A windfall tax is more likely to be successful if it is actually taxing a windfall. But this is not a tax that would be simple to implement. Determining the excess profit is likely to be complex. A time frame for the tax would also need to be determined – a windfall tax should not be permanent.

Finally, there is a general reluctance in New Zealand to use the tax system in an ad hoc way. There is a specific process intended to ensure effective tax policy development. Even if the usual consultation process is bypassed, change is unlikely to be fast.

Are there alternatives?

Another option to minimise excess profits is to introduce a price cap, which sets a maximum price that can be charged for a product or service.

Recently, 15 member states asked the European Union to impose a cap on gas bills to slow rapidly increasing prices. But price caps are infrequently used, as they distort price signals that help determine supply and demand – a crucial component of a well-functioning market.

In the end, windfall taxes can be beneficial. But they are contentious due to the different priorities of shareholders, companies and consumers.

If we’re concerned about inequality and further transfers of wealth away from those who have the least, however, windfall taxes are – at a minimum – worthy of greater consideration.

Lisa Marriott does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. As NZ workers and households tighten their belts, why not a windfall tax on corporate mega-profits too? – https://theconversation.com/as-nz-workers-and-households-tighten-their-belts-why-not-a-windfall-tax-on-corporate-mega-profits-too-194720

Do tenancy reforms to protect renters cause landlords to exit the market? No, but maybe they should

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Martin, Senior Research Fellow, City Futures Research Centre, UNSW Sydney

More Australians are renting their housing longer than in the past. But they have relatively little legal security against rent increases and evictions compared to tenants in other countries. When state governments suggest stronger protections for tenants, landlords and real estate agents claim it will cause disinvestment from the sector, increasing pressure on already tight rental markets.

In research for the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI), published today, we put the “disinvestment” claim to the test. We looked at the impacts of tenancy reforms in New South Wales and Victoria on rental property records over 20 years, as well as surveying hundreds of property investors. We found no evidence to support this claim.

We did find a high rate of turnover as properties enter and leave the sector. This happened regardless of tenancy law reforms. It’s a major cause of the unsettled nature of private rental housing for tenants.

We suggest that if substantial tenancy reforms did cause less committed landlords to exit the sector, that might not be a bad thing.

How did we test the disinvestment claim?

We analysed records of all rental bond lodgements and refunds in Sydney and Melbourne from 2000 to 2020. From these records we can see properties entering the rental sector for the first time (investment) and exiting the sector (disinvestment).

We looked for changes in trends in property entries and exits around two law reform episodes: when the 2010 NSW Residential Tenancies Act took effect, and the start of a tenancy law reform review in Victoria in 2015.

We found no evidence the NSW reforms affected property entries (investment). And property exits (disinvestment) were slightly reduced – that is, fewer properties exited than expected.

In Victoria, we found property entries reduced slightly when the law reform review started – perhaps a sign of investors pausing for “due diligence”. We saw no effect on property exits.

So in neither state did we find evidence of a disinvestment effect.

We also surveyed 970 current and previous property investors, and got a similar picture. When deciding to invest, investors said prospective rental income and capital gains were the most important considerations, but tenancy laws were important too.

On the other hand, tenancy laws were the least-cited reason for disposing of properties. Many more investors said they did it because they judged it a good time to sell and realise gains, or they wanted money for other purposes, or because the investment was not paying as they had hoped.

A state of constant churn

Our research also gives new insights into the private rental sector, which has been growing relative to owner-occupied and social housing.

Small-holding “mum and dad” landlords dominate the sector. Some 70% of landlords own a single property. Multiple-property owners own more properties in total, but still relatively small numbers (rarely more than ten) compared to corporate landlords in other countries who have tens of thousands of properties, or even more. Australia now has some large corporate landlords, but their properties are a tiny fraction of the total rental stock.

Beneath its gradual growth and persistent small-holding pattern, the private rental sector is dynamic. Properties enter and exit the sector very frequently. In both Sydney and Melbourne, our analysis shows, most properties exit within five years of entering.

Chart showing private rental properties, Sydney and Melbourne, 2000–20, by year of first observation in rental bonds data and at five-year intervals — Numbers of private rental properties in Sydney and Melbourne at five-year intervals from 2000 to 2020. Properties are categorised by year of first observation in rental bonds data.
The authors

More than 30% of tenancies begin in a property that’s new to the rental sector. And more than 25% of tenancy terminations happen when the property exits the sector.

Our investor survey also shows the sector’s dynamism. Many investors made repeated investments, owning multiple properties and some interstate. They indicated strong interest in short-term letting, such as Airbnb, and significant minorities had used their properties for purposes other than rental housing.

Australia’s rental housing interacts closely with other sectors, particularly owner-occupied housing, as houses and strata-titled apartments trade between the sectors. The tax-subsidised property prices paid by owner-occupiers heavily influence investors’ gains and decision-making. Rental is also increasingly integrated with tourism, through governments’ permissive approach to short-term letting.

In short, the Australian rental sector is built for investing and disinvesting. As properties churn in and out of rental, renters are churned in and out of housing.

This presents problems for tenants.

A new agenda for tenancy law reform

Australian residential tenancies law has accommodated the long-term growth of the rental sector and its dynamic character. With no licensing or training requirements, it’s easy for landlords to enter the sector. It’s also easy to exit by terminating tenancies, on grounds they want to use a property for other purposes, or even without grounds in many cases.

Over the years tenancy law reform has fixed some problem areas, but with virtually no national co-ordination. Laws are increasingly inconsistent on important topics, such as tenants’ security (for example, some states have restricted, but not eliminated, no-grounds terminations), minimum standards and domestic violence. Reforms have overlooked significant problem areas, such as steep rent increases and landlords’ liability for defective premises.

It is time to pursue a national agenda that goes further than previous limited reforms. The focus should be on the rights of tenants to affordable housing, in decent condition, that supports autonomy and secure occupancy.

Where landlords say it is too difficult and they will disinvest, this should not be taken as a threat. Indeed, it would be a good thing if the speculative, incapable and unwilling investors exited the sector. This would make properties available for new owner-occupiers and open up prospects for other, more committed landlords, especially non-profit providers of rental housing.

Similarly, if we had higher standards and expectations to discourage private landlords from entering the sector, that would open up scope for new owner-occupiers and investors who are less inclined to churn properties and households.

While past tenancy law reforms have not caused disinvestment, maybe the next reforms should.

The authors acknowledge the contributions of their research co-authors, Professor Kath Hulse, Professor Eileen O’Brien Webb, Dr Laura Crommelin and Liss Ralston.

Chris Martin receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI), the ACOSS-UNSW Poverty and Inequality Partnership, Tenants Queensland and the Tenants’ Union of NSW.

Milad Ghasri receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI), ACT Government, has received funding from the NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet, CRC for iMOVE, and Randwick City Council

Sharon Parkinson receives funding from the Australian Housing & Urban Research Institute; NSW Department of Planning Industry and Environment; the Paul Ramsay Foundation; Australian Digital Inclusion Index Telstra.

Zoe Goodall receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI), has previously received funding from the Victorian Government, and is in receipt of an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship.

– ref. Do tenancy reforms to protect renters cause landlords to exit the market? No, but maybe they should – https://theconversation.com/do-tenancy-reforms-to-protect-renters-cause-landlords-to-exit-the-market-no-but-maybe-they-should-194900

What we mean when we say ‘sovereignty was never ceded’

By The Conversation -

November 28, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eddie Synot, Lecturer, Griffith Law School, Griffith University

In discussing the Uluru Statement from the Heart, I will be doing something that, as a lawyer, is perhaps not best practice: I am not going to define my terms or confine my comments to the law.

Although our constitutional system of governance is underpinned by a rigid concept of sovereignty we have inherited from the British parliament, its meaning is in fact quite nebulous.

This sovereignty is not actually defined in our constitution, but rather made out by the structure and role of the institutions within. An example of this legacy is the prime minister not being mentioned. Rather, the prime minister is established by convention as “first among equals”. The only roles mentioned in the Australian Constitution are the ministers of state and cabinet itself, and the executive council.

In a constitutional monarchy, both the Crown and the parliament borrow their authority from the people: the Crown by consent and heredity, and the parliament through the electoral process.

Ostensibly, we in Australia, have two competing claims to sovereignty by right of heredity over this continent: that of the Crown and of Indigenous peoples. But although the case for Indigenous sovereignty seems irrefutable, the reality is much more complicated.

Sovereignty never ceded

There are two undeniable and competing facts about the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australia that both sides must face up to.

The first is summed up in one well known phrase that is much more than a slogan: “sovereignty never ceded”. It is as simple as that.

First Nations have never ceded sovereignty. The land was taken by force and has been retained by force.

Many have claimed Indigenous peoples have acquiesced by default. None are correct. In Arnhem Land and other locations, where Indigenous people only came into contact with Europeans in the 20th century, their law remains the predominant legal system.

Those pockets of uninterrupted continuity of law and culture have enabled Indigenous peoples Australia-wide to refuse to be erased, despite the weight the nation has thrown behind it, and for us to have this conversation today and force this change.

The second, undeniable fact is that the Australian state’s legitimacy does not rest upon a treaty with First Nations. This is a fact that is hard for many to swallow. I don’t agree with it. I don’t like it, but it is a fact we must accommodate if we are to give meaningful expression to Indigenous sovereignty.

The path to change is through understanding and acknowledgement of this fact.

Further, First Nations are not recognised as nation states under international law. It is important to note the international legal system was authored by those same nation states whose invading colonies are founded on Indigenous lands and now draw their authority from them.

So, our rights, even under the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a non-binding agreement, are subservient to the nation states within which we have our legal existence.

With our acceptance of this system comes the fact the Commonwealth of Australia is paramount. Even when we enter treaties with the commonwealth, and states and territories, those agreements remain susceptible to the Australian Constitution and the Commonwealth of Australia.

Short of a coup or an entire rewriting of the Australian nation – neither desirable nor realistic – there is no stepping outside of those authorities. It is constitutionally impossible.

The fabric of government

These are the political and legal realities we must accept as First Nations. No matter how strong the belief in our sovereignty or how just our claims, those facts will never change. Technical points of law and principles of fairness count for little in the face of history. This is the context within which we must frame our response.

Some see it as intractably difficult. I do not. Although we must work within the institutions of the Australian state, this does not mean those institutions must remain irredeemably colonial, nor does it mean we cannot change our nation.

The answer is not to accept loss of sovereignty as an inescapable reality. Instead, we need to navigate a pathway through the system that gives expression to what we mean when we say sovereignty was never ceded.

The delegates of the 13 regional dialogues that led to the Uluru Statement from the Heart understood this.

In a process of deliberative dialogue and informed decision-making, they worked through the political and legal obstacles to giving meaningful expression to Indigenous sovereignty and achieving change. This is a key reason why the First Nations Voice to Parliament enshrined in the constitution comes first in the Statement.

Substantive structural reform to the political system has to come first if the Makarrata Commission for treaty and truth-telling is to have meaningful effect.

We have had treaty promises and truth-telling processes before, but in the absence of this structure they have had little impact on the grander scheme of things.

If we are to change the constitutional structure of this nation then we need to begin here, at its foundation, with the Voice to Parliament: a permanent institutional mechanism that respects First Nations by recognising their place and sovereignty in the fabric of government.

This is an edited extract from Volume 2 of the New Platform Papers: From the Heart: The Voice, the Arts and Australian Identity, available now from www.currency.com.au

Eddie Synot does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. What we mean when we say ‘sovereignty was never ceded’ – https://theconversation.com/what-we-mean-when-we-say-sovereignty-was-never-ceded-195205

Media go for drama on Victorian election – and miss the story

By The Conversation -

November 27, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne

For the best part of two weeks, Victorian voters were told by the media that the election on November 26 might result in either a hung parliament or a minority Labor government.

In the event, the Labor government was returned with a reduced but clear majority, the size of which is not yet known, while the Coalition has suffered a crushing defeat.

How could the pre-election coverage have been at once so breathless and misleading?

The short answer is because of a combination of groupthink and wishful thinking. Unpacking this requires the disclosure of a few trade secrets.

Two days out from polling day, the Herald Sun published an analysis of some focus-group research by RedBridge Group, carried out over the past two years.

It stated the likeliest scenario on November 26 would see Labor with 43 seats and therefore forced to form a minority government, given it requires 45 seats for a majority. The best-case scenario for Labor was 48 seats and a return to government in its own right.

Earlier in the campaign there had been loose talk in the Herald Sun, based on no particular data, that there could be a hung parliament.

Then in the last week, a Resolve Strategic poll for The Age showed the primary vote for Labor and the Coalition tied at 36%.

It seemed the race was tightening and perhaps a hung parliament or a minority government were real possibilities.

For the media, this is exciting stuff. It suggests drama, suspense, uncertainty – all powerful news values.

So at rival newsdesks, one can imagine an element of consternation. A chief of staff (COS) can be imagined ringing a state political reporter:

COS: “See the Herald Sun has a survey suggesting a minority government?”

Reporter: “Yeah, but some of it’s two years old.”

COS: “Yeah but a minority government. That’s big. I think we have to have something.”

Reporter: “All right. Something.”

COS: “I mean, we’ll look like dills if we don’t have something and it happens.”

Hours later at news conference, where decisions are made on what stories go where, everyone around the table has seen the Herald Sun. At The Age they’ve also seen the ABC pick it up and at the ABC they’ve seen The Age pick it up. Each reinforces the other’s assessment of the story’s credibility.

The chief of staff assures conference that state rounds are on to it. Minority government becomes the story. Its origin in qualitative data, some of which is two years old, stoked up by the Herald Sun as part of its relentless campaign against the Andrews government, is forgotten or overlooked.

Evidence to support the minority-government hypothesis is assembled, especially the Resolve Strategic quantitative data showing the primary votes neck-and-neck.

News conference’s resident Cassandra raises a voice. “What about the two-party-preferred?”

Editor: “What about it?”

Cass: “Every poll we’ve seen so far has Labor ahead by up to ten percentage points. And they’re up to date, not weeks, months or years old.”

Editor: “So you’re saying we should just ignore the RedBridge stuff?”

Cass: “No, but you can’t ignore the two-party-preferred either.”

Editor: “All right. Put in a parachute about the two-party-preferred but lead on the minority government. I mean there could even be a hung parliament. We’ll look like dills if we downplay this.”

Yep. And that’s how you look when wishful thinking and groupthink cloud hard-minded analysis of all the available data. Taken together, the data showed the likeliest (but journalistically least interesting) outcome was the return of the government with a reduced majority.

Not only did the two-party-preferred vote not tighten appreciably, but the primary vote turned out not to be neck-and-neck. This is not hindsight. The discrepancy between the two should have raised a red flag: how could the primary vote be neck-and-neck when the two-party-preferred gap was so large?

In fairness, it was reasonable to suppose this could just be a function of how the minor party and independent preferences would flow, which was unknowable at the time. But this seemed not to enter the discussion about the prospect of a minority government.

And a hard-headed look at the RedBridge focus-group data would have revealed to a dispassionate analyst that once the more far-fetched cases had been eliminated, Labor was likely to end up with somewhere between 47 and 50 seats.

The ABC’s election analyst, Antony Green, is giving Labor 52 seats at this stage, with 68% of the vote counted.

Even more curiously, the hung parliament and minority government possibilities were initially generated by the Herald Sun, which acted throughout as a propaganda arm of the Liberal Party. Why on earth would respectable and usually reliable elements of the media such as The Age and the ABC buy into this nonsense?

The answer is that it is an abiding weakness in newsroom decision-making to prefer the most dramatic possibility, however remote, over the most mundane but strongest probability.

It is a further weakness to wish not to be scooped on the most dramatic possibility, even at the expense of misleading your audience, looking foolish in the aftermath and buying into scenarios created by your most politically partisan and least reliable media rival.

The result was a feverish outburst of speculation in the final week of the campaign that fed into questioning of Andrews about whether he would entertain doing deals with crossbenchers if Labor could not muster the 45 seats necessary to form government in its own right.

He batted it away with his customary dismissiveness, and who could blame him?

Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Media go for drama on Victorian election – and miss the story – https://theconversation.com/media-go-for-drama-on-victorian-election-and-miss-the-story-195421

How Dan Andrews pulled off one of the most remarkable victories in modern politics

By The Conversation -

November 27, 2022

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shaun Carney, Vice-Chancellor’s professorial fellow, Monash University

As the 2022 Victorian election campaign moved into its final days late last week, the consensus within the major parties, various community independent candidates, new little parties furious about lockdowns, and the mainstream media was that the election was a referendum on the premier, Daniel Andrews.

Curiously, no-one publicly made the obvious point that if this were so, it was also by definition a referendum on the opposition leader, Matthew Guy. If Andrews, seeking re-election for a third term, was putting the Yes case, then Guy was running the argument for No.

Only two hours after the last vote was cast at 6pm on Saturday, it was clear that Andrews and the Labor government he has headed for eight years had got Yes over the line. Not just over the line, way past it. Labor went into the election with a notional post-redistribution of 56 out of a total of 88 lower house seats. By the close of counting on Saturday night, there was a possibility the ALP could come out of this election with as many as 52 seats.

Given the level of vituperation directed at the government and Andrews in particular – the reflexive resort to the “Dictator Dan” appellation by his opponents in the community, the shoulder-to-the-wheel campaign by the Herald Sun to bury the premier in attacks and innuendo, Guy’s constant portrayal of Andrews as a divisive leader – this was one of the most remarkable victories in modern politics.

The Liberal Party has not adapted to the changes in Victoria as well as Labor, and has been punished at successive elections.
Daniel Pockett/AAP

Few, if any, recent election contests have more starkly demonstrated the importance for mainstream political parties to refresh their positions and personnel, and to try, in the face of declining party memberships, to sustain links to the communities. Labor in Victoria has done this; the Liberals have failed abysmally. The proof of this is in the state’s recent political history. In the 40 years since John Cain led Labor into power, the ALP has produced three leaders who have taken the party to three consecutive election wins: Cain, Steve Bracks and Andrews.

Victoria has changed dramatically in that period – socially, economically and politically. In 1982, a post-war electoral settlement still held, with the working class suburbs of Melbourne’s inner city, the west and the north hewing closely to the Labor Party, while the city’s middle class eastern and southern suburbs plus the regional cities of Geelong, Bendigo and Ballarat largely favoured the Liberals. Unionised manufacturing areas backed Labor, white-collar areas went to the Liberal Party.

Gentrification, the decline of manufacturing, the rise of the knowledge worker, the emergence of health services and tertiary education as important industries, digital communications, rising waves of Asian immigration – all of these have taken place over those 40 years. The Labor Party has managed to adapt to the state’s transformation much more effectively than the Liberals. The ALP has lost and is losing its grip on the inner suburbs but it is strong in the regional cities and in the eastern and bayside suburbs that used to belong to the Liberals.

Neither party could be said to have stellar preselection processes. Labor’s is rigid and in the hands of a small number of faction bosses; the Liberals’ is driven far too much by a party membership that is too narrow and subject to branch stacking.

Hence in the seat of Mulgrave in Melbourne’s south-eastern suburbs, held by Andrews, the party put up a candidate who accused the premier of the “murder of 800 people”. This should, by rights, be a contestable seat for the Liberals or at least a place where someone who is potential future frontbencher material is tried out and given a profile. On Sunday, the candidate was on a primary vote of 15%.

If the 2018 election, which produced the so-called Danslide, giving the ALP a two-party preferred vote of 57.3%, was a disaster for the Liberals, this election amounts to a catastrophe. True, progressive counting on Sunday suggested Labor’s vote after preferences had fallen by three points to 54.2%.

But historically, a number like that would be regarded as a landslide. Labor’s primary vote does appear to have fallen to 37% – almost 6% down on what it secured in 2018. But the coalition’s vote looks to be stalled at 35%, similar to what it attracted four years ago. It’s worth noting too that Labor’s primary vote in Victoria at last May’s federal election was 32.8%.

Does Labor have problems? Certainly. As happened at the federal election, there were massive drops in its primary vote in the northern and western suburbs. But because it held the seats by hefty margins, this was not enough to cause it to lose them. What’s not clear yet is how much of this is structural – a change in the political complexion of these booming suburbs – and how much is due to anger at the effect of lockdowns and the failure of the long-running state Labor government to give its most faithful supporters a better range of services: effectively, more comfortable lives.

Conversely, the eastern suburbs swung slightly to the ALP, a reward for the government’s provision of services and construction on that side of town, including the controversial Suburban Rail Loop.

While the northern and western suburbs turned away from Labor, seats in the south-east swung to it, likely because of increased infrastructure investments such as the Suburban Rail Loop.
Diego Fidele/AAP

Labor also looks set to lose a small number of inner-city seats, formerly Labor strongholds, to Greens. The Greens are presenting this as a “Greenslide” but that’s a bit hyperbolic. The Greens vote looks to have increased barely from 10.7% to 11%. If these seats do fall into the Green column, that will be because of the Liberals deciding to preference the Greens as part of its desperate and wrong-headed “Put Labor last” strategy. The overall effect is for the Liberals to deliberately make the Victorian lower house more left-wing.

But that only serves to underscore just how badly the Liberals have played this election. Having stood down after leading the Liberals to the shocking 2018 defeat, Guy was reinstalled last year, to little effect. There appeared to be no convincing reason, in terms of policy or approach, to reinstate him and ditch the quietly spoken Michael O’Brien.

Ahead of the election, Guy went on a wild spendathon while also promising to reduce debt without raising taxes. This played directly into Labor’s portrayal of him as “the Liberal cuts guy”. It led to a horrible denouement on Thursday when, during a press conference after the final accounting of the parties’ policies by the parliamentary budget office, Shadow Treasurer David Davis could not give a total figure for the coalition’s promises.

That summed up yet another tone-deaf campaign by a party that struggles to keep up with a changing state. And all too often, it convinces itself the loathing its rusted-on supporters and media backers have for its political opponents represents wider community sentiment.

Shaun Carney does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. How Dan Andrews pulled off one of the most remarkable victories in modern politics – https://theconversation.com/how-dan-andrews-pulled-off-one-of-the-most-remarkable-victories-in-modern-politics-194710